Career Mantra’s Official Blog

Today, learners are proliferating, but the instructor population is struggling to match learner growth rates. Learners are in every city, town and village. And, all yearn for quality education. But the quality education givers are few and far between. So how do education planners and implementers reconcile with this mismatch?
Distance learning was thought to be the answer. Indeed, it still is. But there is a difference today in the deliverance because of technology and Internet. The quality gap between face-to-face learning has been bridged as has the distance gap been virtually bridged.

Learner Centric Education

The way we learn has evolved. Users have truly become the center of the learning process. Often times the learners identify the appropriate material and way they want to learn. The time available for learning courses has been telescoped for want of time. The good news is that the time period for online learning is shorter and learners apply the learning directly to their work situation to remain competitive. The opportunities for learning are expanding. Technology provides access to new ways to learn both formally and informally. The younger generation grew up with technology — and demands online access to information, research, processes, and new skills. Step in e-learning.

What is different about e-learning?

e-learning helps learners to reach predicated levels of competency faster. e-learning allows learners to assimilate content at their own speed. If they understand material, they can skim; if it’s new material, they can spend time on the unfamiliar content. Contrast it with the classroom; instruction moves at the will of the instructor, who gears the class pace to meet needs of the majority of learners, not the needs of individual learners.
Learners can engage in learning anytime, anywhere, and from any location. Learners control when and where they want to do their learning. Some choose to learn from home while others take a “learning break” that breaks the monotony of the workday. Some even access learning from their mobile devices as they travel. This freedom to learn based on personal preference makes for happier, more engaged learners who find it easier to stay up-to-date on their knowledge and skills.
Consistency of eLearning delivers uniform content to all learners. No matter where the learners are located, they receive the same content, eliminating content variance that is often present with instructor-led learning.
Travel savings are significant. e-learning eliminates a significant amount of air, train and auto travel.

But what of the quality of e-learning, vis-à-vis face-to-face learning?

Classroom And Online Self-Study Prove Equally Effective.Outside of subject areas where face-to-face interaction is inescapable – for example, say a medical student is doing the rounds of the ward with her instructor – recent research indicates that no significant differences exist in the effectiveness of learning through classroom, online, or self-study. This is because of the following:
Meticulously crafted graphics and visuals help explain new concepts. Visuals, graphics, simple simulations, and even short videos contribute to a more visual approach to understanding concepts. This, combined with instructor’s audio help, ensure good learning. In fact, some animated sequences in eLearning would be difficult to duplicate in the classroom.
Responses through blogs, wikis, and discussion boards help learners see other points of view. The danger of isolation of online learners is mitigated by a plethora of interactive tools used to reinforce the learning.
Content is available to review multiple times. The opportunity to access specific sections of the learning content as many times as necessary to grasp key concepts provides for a better overall understanding of the topic. Also, choosing the best time to learn puts the learner in a better frame of mind to learn.

The end note therefore is that while e-learning maps easily with fast forward learning, the learner has the power to press the pause button at her will. Clearly, e-learning has arrived.

Recall that in my pre­vi­ous arti­cle ‚I pointed out that there are hun­dreds of e-Learning author­ing tools in the mar­ket today. Select­ing the proper tool for devel­op­ing con­tent is not a triv­ial task.

In this arti­cle let us look at some dom­i­nant fac­tors that should influ­ence your deci­sion while choos­ing the best con­tent author­ing tool that is right for your Learn­ing Man­age­ment Sys­tems.

Here is a list of ques­tions you should ask dur­ing the eval­u­a­tion process of con­tent author­ing tool. This will save you time and money.

• What type of train­ing are you pro­vid­ing?
• Is it a blended learn­ing (partly online and partly class­room) expe­ri­ence?
• Will you pro­vide train­ing on CD/DVD or other media?
• Do you aim to get your learners cer­ti­fied on a prod­uct, ser­vice, or pro­ce­dure?
• Is a cer­tain soft­ware appli­ca­tion being taught?
• Do you have the resources to sup­port the type of online train­ing you wish to develop and con­duct?
• Do you have graphic design­ers?
• Do you have appro­pri­ate sub­ject mat­ter experts?
• Does the train­ing needs to be refreshed peri­od­i­cally? Say, any­where from 6 months to a year or beyond?
• Do you have resources for ren­di­tion of voice over?
• Do you have video pro­duc­ers?
• Do you have mod­els to ani­mate the con­tent that you want to develop?
• Do you have pro­duc­tion Design­ers?
• What hap­pens after the train­ing has been devel­oped?
• Will any tests be asso­ci­ated with the train­ing changes?
• Will you have the right resources and sup­port in place for any ongo­ing e-leaning con­tent devel­op­ment needs?
• Does the author­ing tool sup­port all mul­ti­me­dia file for­mats which are required by your e-Learning course con­tent?
• What level of inter­ac­tiv­ity is required for the train­ing?
• Sim­u­la­tions and other dynamic learn­ing activ­i­ties are great to have, but are they really appro­pri­ate or needed for the type of Com­puter Based Train­ing that you are devel­op­ing?

Flash has become the stan­dard tool used for many inter­ac­tive e-learning activ­i­ties. Do a rain check to see whether your tools are com­pat­i­ble with Flash.

• How much is bud­geted for the project?
• What things are spe­cific to the type of train­ing and may be com­pro­mised if out­sourced?
• How steep is the learn­ing curve asso­ci­ated with the tools you are think­ing of using for the project?
• What plat­forms will the train­ing be deliv­ered on?
• Does the online train­ing have to work across a com­bi­na­tion of plat­forms such as Win­dows, MAC, Linux or oth­ers?
• Does e-learning con­tent have to work across a vari­ety of browsers?

Total sys­tem cost

It is always best to eval­u­ate any soft­ware by look­ing at the total cost of own­er­ship (TCO). TCO is a finan­cial esti­mate. Its pur­pose is to help con­sumers and enter­prise man­agers deter­mine direct and indi­rect costs of a prod­uct or sys­tem.

The TCO would include the cost of the appli­ca­tion, train­ing, upgrades, main­te­nance, and any other costs asso­ci­ated with the own­er­ship of the prod­uct over its life­time.

Some Sit­u­a­tional Para­me­ters: Be mind­ful that not all tools are appro­pri­ate for a given train­ing deliv­ery method. It is impor­tant to con­sider the con­text in which con­tent author­ing tools will be used. As you gather infor­ma­tion, keep in mind that as long as your com­puter based train­ing (CBT) is founded on good instruc­tional design prin­ci­ples, the inter­ac­tiv­ity pro­duced by the author­ing tool you choose will strengthen the learner’s expe­ri­ence. So con­sider train­ing objec­tives while choos­ing the author­ing tool.

In next part of the series we will take a closer look at some of the pop­u­lar e-Learning Con­tent Author­ing Tools.

There is now compelling evidence that online learning has pipped face-to-face learning at the post. The nose is just ahead though. But this is significant since till now it was felt that the race between online learning and face-to-face learning was a dead heat at best.
A study conducted by U.S. Department of Education Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development Policy and Program Studies Service has concluded that online learning has surged ahead of face-to-face learning. The report is now in the public domain.

The motivation of this study was: Online learning—for students and for teachers—is one of the fastest growing trends in educational uses of technology. The National Center for Education Statistics (2008) estimated that the number of K-12 public school students enrolling in a technology-based distance education course grew by 65 percent in the two years from 2002-03 to 2004-05. On the basis of a more recent district survey, Picciano and Seaman (2009) estimated that more than a million K–12 students took online courses in school year 2007–08. (Page 12)

The genesis of online learning is distance learning. Distance learning has been around for over a century now. But the advantage of the World Wide Web has caused the online learning to explode.

The study focuses on the two main purposes of online learning:

(a) Learning conducted totally online as a substitute or alternative to face-to-face learning
(b) Online learning components that are combined or blended (sometimes called “hybrid”)
with face-to-face instruction to provide learning enhancement

Findings:
The overall finding of the meta-analysis is that classes with online learning (whether taught completely online or blended) on average produce stronger student learning outcomes than do classes with solely face-to-face instruction. (Page 38)

This is a significant tilt towards online learning. Earlier studies had concluded that online learning is only as effective as face-to-face learning. The second area of study also gave thumbs up to online learning. It said:

Blends of online and face-to-face instruction, on average, had stronger learning outcomes than did face-to-face instruction alone (Page 39)

Clearly, it makes sense for companies to move over to online learning and elearning, where possible. Not only will it cut costs but will also be a substantially better experience both for learners and teachers.

Over the last months we’ve been paying closer attention to e-Learing content creation techniques and content authoring tools and have tried to understand how each of these tools work and how they can benefit other learning content creators. Such techniques/tools are often hard to find much less the methodology to use them. It would worth exploring all these tools in detail. Career Mantra team will cover these in a series of posts.

In these series of articles will help you to understand  the top e-learning authoring tools that can be useful for your upcoming courses. There are many soft wares that can help you to weave learning content  faster and effectively.

First, let us look at the glossary of some e-learning terms; their definitions and descriptions.

Learning Management System(LMS)

Learning management system is an application used to plan, implement and assess learning processes related to online and offline training, administration and performance management.

LMS provides a teacher, trainer or instructor a means by which s/he can create content, deliver content, monitor learners’ participation, and assess student performance. LMS also provide learners with interactive features, such as internal messaging, video conferencing , event/calendar management , discussion forums, and other methods of communication.

In general LMS has its own online content authoring tool as part of the overall system. There are many content authoring tools in the market.Although they call themselves Learning Management System they are  really just front end authoring tools with little or almost no LMS functionalities.  So the bottom line here is that a good Learning Management System should be able to deliver the content created using any content  authoring tool.

Content Authoring Tool

A content authoring tool is a software application used to create a rich learning content typically for delivery on the World Wide Web. Content authoring tools may also create content in other file formats so that content can be delivered on a CD or in other formats for various uses.The package of content authoring tools include HTML, Flash, and other types of e-Learning authoring libraries.

Course Authoring Tool

A course authoring tool is similar to content authoring tool. The only difference in course authoring tool is that it can create a complete  course package while content authoring tools create subject specific online content. Subject specific online content  has less features and functionality than  online course. Of course this also depends on the software used to create the content.

SCORM/AICC compliant

SCORM is an acronym for Sharable Courseware Object Reference Model , which is a set of specifications , when applied to course content, produces small, reusable eLearning objects. A result of the US Department of Defense’s Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) initiative, SCORM-compliant courseware elements are easily merged with other compliant elements to produce a highly modular set of training courses.

AICC stands for the Aviation Industry CBT [Computer-Based Training] Committee, which is an international association of technology-based training professionals that develop training guidelines for the e-Learning industry. They are very few e-Learning content-authoring tools that are fully SCORM/AICC compliant.  The point to be noted is , as long as the content-authoring tool is SCORM/AICC compliant (creates SCORM/AICC compliant courses) and the Learning Management System is SCORM/AICC compliant (works with SCORM/AICC courses), they always  work together seamlessly.

In next part of the series we will take a closer look at the factors to be considered while choosing the content authoring tools.

In the June09 issue of Harvard Business Review, Mr Robert I. Sutton writes about How to Be a Good Boss in a Bad Economy. His remedies for the Boss were predictability, understanding, control and compassion. He gives examples to further his argument about his remedies. While his explanation followed his remedy – it was predictable – his example on compassion had me bristled.

First, a little digression on compassion. These days we are bandying around compassion as a skill. As if it were something that one learns at the blacksmith’s or at the carpenter’s. It is our very innate nature, for God’s sake. It has nothing to do with managers or employees or with royalty; it is mine because of being a human being. It is our seventh sense. Don’t ever call it a soft skill. Compassion is not a good thing to have. It is the right thing to have.

Now, for that example on compassion. Let me quote Mr Sutton:

Quote

Jerald Greenberg, a management professor at The Ohio State University, provides compelling evidence that compassion affects the bottom line in tough times. Greenberg studied three nearly identical manufacturing plants in the Midwest that were all part of the same company; two of them (which management chose at random) instituted a temporary 10-week pay cut of 15% after the firm had lost a major contract. At one of the two, the executive who conveyed the news did so curtly, announcing, “I’ll answer one or two questions, but then I have to catch a plane for another meeting.” At the other one, the executive who broke the news gave a detailed and compassionate explanation, along with apologies and multiple expressions of remorse. He also spent a full hour answering questions about why the cost cutting was necessary, who would be affected, and what steps workers could take to help themselves and the plant. Greenberg found fascinating effects on employee theft rates. At the plant where the curt explanation was given, the rate rose to more than 9%. But at the plant where management’s explanation was detailed and compassionate, it rose only to 6%. (At the third plant, where no pay cuts were made, the rate held steady at about 4% during the 10-week period.)

Unquote

It is unfortunate that he gives thieving of employees as an example to buttress his idea about compassion for employees. It would appear that researchers such as Mr Greenberg – as quoted by Mr Sutton - think that employees by nature are prone to thieving. Why else would one do such a gratuitous research?
I would imagine that Mr Greenberg’s research hypothesis read:
This research establishes a correlation between increase of theft by employees and the abruptness of language used by CEOs conveying salary reduction news.
And from this research Mr Sutton got compelling evidence that compassion begets less thieving!
I think this is absolutely unfair to employees.

I have been asked this question as many number of times as the world population. And of course, some people have asked it more than once. My answer is simple: “Doesn’t Matter”. You will get (or not get) a job either way.

Let me clarify that a company basically does not look for a Java programmar or a .NET programmer. First of all you need to be a programmar. That is where most of the freshers lack in the current world. If your computer science fundamentals are strong and aptitude is good, picking up either of these is a two months job. I have reiterated this in many seminars/articles/talks.

Assuming you have strong fundamentals, which one you would prefer to take as a programming language of your choice?

As of now, there are more jobs in Java than in .NET but incidentally the competition is a lot less in .NET .

Choose one…any one. And stick to it for quite some time. Does not matter if you are not able to attend walkins/tests in the other stream. There will always be good number of jobs in your own stream. And remember, strong fundamentals would always be preferred over syntactical knowledge of either language.

Just out of college or packing your baggage to get out soon. We talked to various freshers and digged out some very common myths or misconception they have regarding IT job interview process. Though there are millions (okay…thousands..or even hundreds..no less) of them we are only putting the most common ones here. This might be difficult for for a 10+ yrs experience professional to digest, but this how freshers (or most of them) think. Can we help their thinking…yes..may be.

Myth #10: Lowering Your Salary Demands Will Increase your chances of selection.

When you are struggling for a job, sometimes you may be tempted to lower your demand and grab the offer letter immediately. Unfortunately or fortunately an IT company does not think in the same way. It is more interested in getting value from you (I mean your work..) rather than saving money on your salary. While asking for a much higher salary may show you a greedy, lowering expectation may lower the value perception. If you know what the company offers for a similar skillset and experience, try to be in +/- 20% range.

Myth #9: A tie is a must for an entry level job interview.

While it is important to be neatly dressed in formals, wearing a tie will not add any point to your score.Only if you feel comfortable with a tie, wear it.

Myth #8: Entry level salaries are fixed and cannot be negotiated.

While most of the big companies advertise their entry level salaries, it does vary based on your college, past experience, marks and your performance in the interview process. If you are being asked your salary expectation you may have some room to negotiate.

Myth #7: Only the best person gets hired.

Hiring a large number of freshers (from an even larger number of freshers) is so strenuous that most people resort to selection by elimination. It may be on the basis of your marks, degree, FCFS (first come first serve) or anything. Do you really think that getting a 69% guy is in any way inferior to a 71% guy. As long as you have done full preparation you should not get unnecessary complexes. If you have not done any preparation for job then any person getting selected is better (in fact much better) than you.

Myth #6: If I write many projects in CV it will catch their attention.

No, It will get you more trouble than you can handle. Highlight only bigger projects (rather than every term papers you would have done in every alternate course). And, be fully prepared to answer every question about these projects.

Myth #5: Writing both C#.NET and Java/J2EE will boost my chances of CV getting selected.

Half of the world is .NET and the other half is Java. If I write both skills in my CV I have the full universe (superset) with me. It is going to exactly double my chances of selection…Wrong. It would reduce your probability to exactly half if not less. The only conclusion a sane (read experience IT professional) person would draw is that you do not know any of these. Write (and also prepare) only one of them. Which one ? I will answer in a future post. So keep coming to my blog.

Myth #4: A flashy resume is more likely to get attention than a simpler one.

Unfortunately the flash in only limited to pan. A person who is filtering has played it enough.Keep it simple and do not promise that you are going to change the face of the company. More tips on Resume Writing later.

Myth #3: If a company is not currently hiring I do not stand a chance.

Though it may look very contradictory, but only 20-25% of overall IT jobs are publicized in advertisement or otherwise. Rest all is filled through references, unsolicited CVs and job portals. Now you know what to do.

Myth #2: If I have potential, it will get recognized in interview.

If you do NOT have potential, it will definitely get recognized in interview but if you have potential there is no guarantee of recognition. Confusing..okay let me put it very simply. What if you have very good technical knowledge and you also have good (interesting) hobbies and your extra curricular record is shining. There is a definite chance of discussion leading to some other path and you not being able to tell the interviewer that you have it (what it takes to make a good software engineer). If needed interrupt him and try to take the discussion to your strong areas. In the worst case simply ask for it by specifically telling him your strengths.

Myth #1: IT companies are more inclined towards students who have advance knowledge of C#.NET or Java/J2EE

This one is the most common (and the bad one too). Kindly undertsand that technologies will change completely at least 4-5 times in your software career. What is important for you is in-depth understanding of programming fundamentals and analytical skills. IT companies realize that once your fundamentals are at right place you can quickly learn new emerging technologies and be productive very fast. Take my word, you are definitely not going to end you career with any of these two. It is important for you to spend sufficient time on your analytical skills and programming fundamentals which will serve as a base for your entire career.