9 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2019
    1. 7 Gamification Strategies for Corporate Training

      This article by the Tech Edvocate discusses seven ways to gamify corporate training. I find this personally important because I often use games to teach my adult learners about some of the most boring topics. (For instance, I'm currently creating training to explain the theory and calculations behind a very complex distribution management software tool. Imagine explaining how a calculator works to provide correct answers to math equations, then multiply that a few times. It's tough.) According to this article, in order to gamify, instructors can specify learning objectives, use reward systems, incorporate social interaction, and challenge learners to make gamified learning successful. 8/10

  2. Nov 2017
  3. Sep 2016
  4. Jul 2016
    1. Tyton’s Bryant sees LinkedIn, Lynda and Microsoft tapping into continuing and lifelong learning, an arena in which he thinks higher-ed institutions have done poorly.
    2. much more tied to employment

      Cue Thorstein.

    3. “In my perfect world, I have a competency profile — you know, on LinkedIn, presumably — that is kept up to date in real time on the competencies that I am exhibiting in my work, as well as competencies that I’ve demonstrated through assessments, through my education, the formal credentials that I’ve accrued,”

      It’s a very specific dream, but it sounds like it’s shared by a lot of people.

    4. traditional certification market
    5. currently fragmented corporate-training market

      There’s typically a big gap between “education” and corporate training. Sounds like the deal is more about the latter than the former.

  5. Jun 2016
    1. Businesses are not saying "I want someone who went through a programme that promised them a job".

      In the Ivory Tower, we hear less about that part of the relationship between Higher Ed. and businesses. Those colleagues of ours who are so against the 100-year push for universities to become more vocational tend to assume that employers are the ones doing the pushing. While it’s quite possible that some managers wish for universities to produce optimised employees, many people on that side of the equation argue that they’re quite able to train employees, as long as they’re able to learn. Now, there’s a whole thing about the “talent pipeline” which might get faculty in a tizzy. But it’s not about moulding learners into employees. Like much of Higher Ed., it’s about identifying (and labeling) people who conform to a certain set of standards. Not less problematic, perhaps, but not so much of a distinction between academia and employability.