So greift Wikipedia-Gründer Jimmy Wales Facebook an

Es gibt eine Reihe von Nachrichtendiensten und Artikeln, die in den letzten Tagen auf WT.Social, das neue soziale Netzwerk von Wikipedia-Gründer  Jimmy Wales, hingewiesen haben. Einen Link habe ich herausgepickt. Die wichtigsten Eckdaten des Artikels: Über 200.000 Nutzer haben sich bereits angemeldet. Jetzt geht es nur noch auf die Warteliste, oder man registriert sich als zahlender Sponsor. Ein Experiment …

„WT Social soll ausschließlich über freiwillige Spenden der Nutzer finanziert werden. „Wir werden niemals deine Daten verkaufen“, heißt eines der Versprechen. … Die Qualität der Inhalte solle dadurch gesteigert werden, dass alle Nutzer jeden Eintrag bearbeiten oder löschen können.“

Hier mein aktueller Status: „You are number 233.315 on the waiting list …“
Arvid Kaiser, manager magazin, 20. November 2019

Division in a row with Captivate

Hello Captivaters !… 

After the addition, the soustraction and the multiplication, here is the division !!… 

Play

Nothing very special in this project…

I use variables for the numbers => C : B = A (and randomize them with Javascript)

And the widget “Scrolling Text” for the answer…

The only difficulty I had was with the number of tries attached to the validate buton… I didn’t manage to make this work as I expected with the Captivate option… So I created another variable to track the number of tries…

Time to revise the division ? Let’s go !…

And happy Captivating !…

			</div><!-- .entry-content -->
	    
	<footer class=

Free eBook: Instructional Design 101

Choosing the best Instructional Design strategy for designing and developing an astounding online training course that benefits your organization is not an easy task. In this article, I'll discuss how and why mastering Instructional Design can lead to very effective online training courses.

This post was first published on eLearning Industry.

Zur Dominanz von US-Plattformen

„Seecontainer für die Bildung“: Ein Appell zur Zusammenarbeit und für die Entwicklung offener Standards in der Bildung. Christien Bok ist Educational Innovation Manager bei SURF, einer niederländischen Bildungskooperative. Was sie fürchtet, ist eine Dominanz großer Plattformen im Bildungsbereich, getragen von den Big Five (Apple, Facebook, Google, Amazon, Microsoft) oder Anbietern wie Coursera oder Udemy. Denn diese Anbieter sind nicht am Schutz von Werten wie Privatsphäre, Sicherheit, Zuverlässigkeit, Transparenz, Gleichheit und demokratischer Kontrolle interessiert. Deshalb braucht es Gegengewichte in Form von internationalen Vereinbarungen und offenen Standards. Anwendungsfelder, die Christien Bok nennt: die Identität der Studierenden, die Zertifizierung und Validierung von Lernleistungen, Studiendaten. Gute, wichtige Punkte!
Christien Bok, Hochschulforum Digitalisierung/ Blog, 20. November 2019

Bildquelle: Moritz Kindler (Unsplash)

How to quickly find the cause of a performance problem

“Why” is a useful question when you’re getting to the root of a performance problem. But it has a more powerful cousin: “What for?” Here’s an example.

Your client, Joe, wants ethics training.

“People are lying when they file their performance reports,” he says. “They say they did more work than they actually completed. So I want you to create a one-hour course on ethics.”

You could obey and make grownups sit through a course that tells them it’s wrong to lie, or you could examine the problem more closely. Let’s examine the problem, and start with “why.”

“Why” is easy to dodge

“Why are people lying on their performance reports?” you ask.

“Because they don’t realize how important it is to be honest,” Joe says. “That’s why they need a course on ethics.”

Joe has answered your question in good faith, but you haven’t made any progress. Joe hasn’t seen any reason to doubt his assumptions.

Let’s rewind and try again, this time with “what for?”

“What for?” uncovers motives

“What do they lie for?” you ask.

“They want to look good even when they can’t do the work,” Joe says. “We have a competitive culture.”

Now we’re getting somewhere. Our next question can be “why” because we’ve steered Joe down a better path.

“Why can’t they do the work?” we ask.

“They have too much on their plates,” Joe says. “And if they ask for help, their managers tell them to stop whining.”

Obviously, a one-hour course on ethics will do nothing for Joe. And now he’s willing to look more deeply at the problem to find a better solution.

This is a variation on an example from the Partner from the Start toolkit, which helps you stop being an order-taker and steer clients toward the most effective solutions.

Another example

“Our patients complain that nurses are abrupt,” our client says. “The nurses just do their tasks quickly and leave. So we need a course on bedside manner.”

Why?
Q. Why are the nurses abrupt?

A. Because they don’t understand the importance of bedside manner. That’s why we need a course.

What for?
Q. What are the nurses abrupt for?

A. They don’t want to get drawn into a conversation with the patient, because they have to hurry to the next one. We’re understaffed.

There’s a solution to this problem, and it isn’t a course on bedside manner.

Listen to the types of answers you’re getting

We analyze performance problems to see if training really is part of the solution. If you’re asking “why” and hearing about alleged ignorance (“they don’t understand,” “they don’t think it’s important”), clients will continue to assume that training is the solution. To have them look deeper, try “what for?”

Discuss this post on LinkedIn.