Google Ad #1 - desktop - 728x90

Google Ad #3 - desktop - 728x90

Google Ad #1 - mobile - 300x200

Google Ad #3 - mobile - 300x200

ATD_Half_Page

Googel Ad #1 - Side Bar - Content pages

ATD Footer Logo

Catherine King is course development supervisor at IGT (International Game Technology), headquartered in Reno, Nevada. She has served on the board of the ASTD Sierra Nevada Chapter, and is currently involved in the design and implementation of an LCMS for the systems and technical training departments at IGT.

Catherine King

ATD Links Archive - ATD Links

Chatting Up Your LMS

In the Land of the Blind One Eye is King

Paula J. King served both as a successful corporate leader and founding dean of the School of Business and Leadership at St. Catherine University in St. Paul, Minnesota. She has extensive experience developing people, leading strategy, creating innovative leadership development programs, and administering new academic programs in universities. Paula has deep knowledge and wisdom about what it takes to succeed in today’s organizations, and has developed emerging leaders for more than 20 years in the corporate, nonprofit, and higher education sectors. She is a connector and relationship builder, and has been recognized for her creativity, innovation, and partnership skills.

Paula King

A learning environment is a deliberately curated collection of learning resources and activities related to a specific learning need.The environment metaphor is an important one—it’s an image that encompasses all the components that surround living things. In a good environment, the components contribute to well-being and growth. In a well-designed landscape, for example, the environment includes sunlight, soil, water, and other elements, and the landscaper ensures the right elements to help the desired plants thrive.As defined here, a learning environment is intended to help people to learn and develop, and it, too, is designed using a wide range of components that support that endeavor. But to list all of the possible components of a learning environment would be as challenging as listing all of the possible plants to grow in a garden. Species of plants have multiple varieties, and new cultivars are created every day. In planting a garden, choices depend on climate, location, soil type, and gardener’s preferences.A similar process takes place when designing a learning environment. There is a world of options for resources and activities—and because new activities and resources are created regularly, it would be impossible to list all the possibilities. Even so, it’s helpful to start with a solid list of potential components to include.Breakdown of ComponentsThe typical components of a learning environment can be sorted into six broad categories:resources, people, training and education, development practices, experiential learning practices, and learner motivation and self-direction.Resources-Performance support-Personal knowledge management-RSS feeds and other filtered information feeds-Shared documents and wiki spaces-Online databases and knowledge management systems-Books, articles, and Internet resources-Job aids-Podcasts and video-casts-Briefings (content delivery without activities)-Procedure manuals and technical manuals-Tools to support learner content sharingPeople-Peer support systems-Social media connections (blogs, microblogs, social bookmarking)-Group forums or discussion boards-Expert directories-Communities of practice-Mentor relationships and developmental networks-Coaching Professional networks (live and online; professional organizations, user groups) Conferences and professional meetings-Tools to support interactionTraining and Education-Courseware and seminars (internal or external; in any delivery format)-Formal coaching after training-On-the-job training Academic courses, degree programs, MOOCs (massive open online courses)Certificate, certification, and licensing programs-Follow-up activities and exercises designed to support learning and application (enrichment and reflection activities)-Tools to support delivery of engaging learning activitiesDevelopment Practices-Action learning programs-Stretch assignment management-Rotation and other experiential learning programs based in workplace activities-After-action review practices-Supervisor support, feedback, and coaching-Communication activities to influence learning readiness and application-Career coaching and developmentExperiential Learning Practices-Learning by doing-Engaging in critical reflection-Experimenting-Collaborating-Self-monitoring and analysis of outcomes and feedback-Creating personal notes, job aids-Teaching and creating resources for othersLearner Motivation and Self-Direction-Desire to learn-Belief in link between learning and performance-Confidence in ability to learn-Self-directednessThese components can be curated into a learning environment to provide a wide range of possible supports for learning. Each project will have different particulars, and this list is not meant to be exhaustive; instead its aim is to prompt ideas for creating a robust, well-designed learning environment.You’ll notice as well that several of the categories suggest specific tools—such as blogging or microblogging tools, screen capture soft­ware, and video tools—not because the tools are learning assets, but because the learners can use them to create and add to the learning components available in the environment. Designers often include links to these kinds of tools when they create the learning portals that act as the entry point to the learning environment.It’s also important to notice how much of a learning environment is intangible, embedded in relationships and work practices. While an electronic portal is often useful for assembling materials and activities, the environment is physical and interpersonal as well as virtual.Finally, the list of components is compiled from a larger pool of potential items derived from industry models and long-term experience. Those familiar with the theories will notice elements of blended learning, transfer of learning, informal learning, and social learning theory and practice, along with ideas contributed by personal knowledge manage­ment and constructivist learning advocates. Looking across these streams of thought yields a very rich list of potential learning resources, activities, and practices, which were categorized to make identifying and selecting them a bit easier.For more advice on how to make your learning environment grow, check out Learning Environments by Design (ATD Press, 2015). This book empowers you to customize learning for your workforce and unearths the answers to the questions you’ve been asking: How does learning happen? What is the future of instructional design? What makes learning environments work?

How to Plant a Learning Environment That Helps Employees Grow

 In my last post, I explored how certain personality differences--described by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®) assessment—give rise to an approach to work that is often confused with procrastination. MBTI preferences for either Perceiving (P) or Judging (J) describe how we organize the world, and at what point we want to make a final decision. The tendency of those preferring P to usually wait to make a final decision until close to the deadline—and thus begin the actual production portion of a project later—is often mistakenly labeled as procrastination. This behavior stems from the need to gather as much information as possible before closing off any options, not from a lackadaisical approach to work. Although often misunderstood, their most effective and efficient energy actually comes close to the deadline or end of the project. Those preferring Judging, on the other hand, are most efficient at the beginning of the project, and naturally employ a work style that incorporates making decisions and going into production mode much earlier in the process--a characteristic that our culture more frequently associates with productivity and efficiency. Within teams, simply knowing that these differences exist can pave the way toward a less stressful, more productive work environment that enables individuals to more fully leverage their natural talents. However, intellectualizing J/P differences is one thing, but actually implementing changes that allow team members to deploy both work styles within the same project is quite another issue. Individuals can achieve top-notch results employing either approach, but teams can also encounter major problems if these radically different work styles aren’t effectively integrated. Making Team Tradeoffs That Don’t Sacrifice Individual Effectiveness Often in teambuilding we talk about “flexing” one’s preferences to work more effectively with someone with an opposite preference, which involves operating outside one’s preferred style. For most of us this is a growing experience and a necessary part of career development. However, while flexing works quite well when bridging Introversion/Extraversion differences, for example, it is actually quite difficult to flex your work style between Judging and Perceiving without diminishing your effectiveness. Those preferring J who try to operate within a P work style will perform below their abilities, and vice versa. Rather than expecting individuals to flex their natural styles, teams need to make structural trade-offs that will allow every member of the team to work within his or her own preferences. Agreeing on Deadlines The most immediate area where this can be applied involves deadlines and milestones. Both J and P preferences find deadlines to be a helpful tool in accomplishing goals. Yet the way that those preferring P approach deadlines may be confusing to J-preferring colleagues, and vice versa. Those who prefer P are averse to the kind of arbitrary or fake deadlines which are sometimes imposed by those with J preferences for the purpose of motivating their P colleagues going into production mode earlier in the process. Meanwhile, those who prefer J might use deadlines as a tool to keep a project on track and are usually motivated to complete projects significantly before the deadline to avoid the last minute rush. Those preferring P tend to view deadlines as markers indicating the point at which something truly must be completed. This also helps them determine when they need to start working on the project in order to maximize their productivity—which for them is closer to the deadline. Consequently, if J-preferring team members try to impose arbitrary deadlines on P-preferring colleagues as markers or motivators to keep a project on pace, they’ll know they really have more time, and will view these as “fake” and often won’t take them seriously. Furthermore, this creates a situation that likely forces those with P preferences to complete tasks early in the project, when they’re less productive because they haven’t had sufficient time to explore all the possibilities for the projects direction. You can get better results from P-preferring colleagues by setting deadlines that accurately reflect a project’s realities, allowing them to plan their work in such a way that lets them get most of the project done at the end, when they’re most productive. When negotiating milestone dates, be sure that they are visibly tied to the real-life consequences of not meeting that deadline. If, for example, a client needs a set of blueprints by a certain date, the milestones should reflect the actual steps that need to be taken in order to make that happen--not just the J-preferences need to complete a project significantly before the actual deadline to allow time for revision. Accepting a Larger View of What Constitutes “Reality” On the flip side, those preferring P must appreciate that their J-preferring colleagues operate most efficiently on a more scheduled timeline. What’s more, they must respect the fact that some J preference team members may not do their best work when handed a project at the last minute. So, if you must deliver a set of blueprints to a J-preferring colleague for review or iteration, understand that they really need to do this earlier in the process in order to offer their best, most efficient work. Adopt the point of view that this is not an arbitrarily early deadline, but rather one that is necessary to ensure the quality of the project. Be willing to set and adhere to milestones that accommodate the J’s need for more structure, and earlier project completion. Bottom Line: Don’t Ask a Pea Factory to Produce Carrots Furthermore, a P-preferring manager working with a predominantly J-preferring team must take into account that last minute changes to a project may have a profoundly negative effect on the group’s ability to deliver excellent results. J-preferring individuals tend to work along a more even pace, accomplishing a great deal of a project’s tasks near the beginning of the process. Throwing a last-minute curve ball at a team that primarily prefers P might be okay, because they don’t go fully into production mode until the end of a project. In other words, they’ve been spending their time getting their ducks in a row, and in manufacturing parlance, the “factory” hasn’t yet opened. A predominantly J-preferring team, on the other hand, will have likely gone into production mode much earlier, so significant changes in direction can’t occur late in a project. It’s like asking a factory to produce canned carrots when it’s already started producing peas. If you want carrots, ask for them before the factory turns on its conveyor belts.

Brokering Peace in the War Over Deadlines

Often when we’re frustrated at work, it’s not so much because of the company we work for, but rather the specific role we’re in. Personality type, as described by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® instrument (MBTI®), offers insight into certain preferences—particularly for how we take in information and make decisions,  which heavily contribute to on-the-job satisfaction. The more we work within our preferences, the more energized and less drained we’ll feel. As discussed in my previous post, your current job may not map well to your preferences. However, if the broader company culture is more in line with who you are and your personality, pursuing a new role within the organization might be preferable to looking elsewhere for employment. Just as personality types describe human beings, you can in fact “type” a company, department, or role by observing how information is gathered and decisions are made.. Use personality type as a guide for determining a better fitting role—looking at what is not only required of an individual, but also what skills and attributes are most sought after in various departments. Identifying What You Really Want to Do Children are often asked: “What do you want to be when you grow up?” In seeking a new role within your company, a better question to ask yourself is: “What do you want to do?” By discovering the kinds of tasks and responsibilities that line up with your core motivators, you can more accurately identify a more satisfying role within your current company. According Allen L. Hammer in “Introduction to Type® and Careers,” you can begin by asking yourself:What do I want to do on a day-to-day basis?Where do I want to be in one, five or ten years?What kind of people do I want to work with?What kind of working environment do I find most comfortable?What kind of working environment allows me to be most productive?What motivates me to do my best? Regarding this last point, while preferences for Thinking (T) or Feeling (F) describe how we make decisions, Sensing (S) and Intuition (N) describe the types of information that we base those decisions on, and the combination of these indicates what will most motivate us at work:ST:  achieving bottom line resultsSF: offering practical serviceNF: making a meaningful differenceNT: improving the system. Research shows that people actually self-select into occupations that coincide with these middle letter preferences. For example, if you have an F preference, you may experience great satisfaction in a role where you get to help or support other people. This can manifest itself in a number of ways—helping customers, mentoring, serving on an advisory board, improving society, or making the world a better place. Additionally, for those with a preference for Feeling, keep in mind that the overall result of your work can also affect your ultimate level of job satisfaction. For instance, you may find that even though you’re not spending as much time performing “helping-type” tasks in your day-to-day activities, you could still be energized by a job that ultimately contributes to a greater good for people. If you work for Habitat for Humanity or at a university, even though your day-to-day activities might not involve direct “helping” activities, knowing you’re a cog in the wheel that makes a difference in peoples’ lives may be enough to keep you energized. Molding Your Own Role If you have a preference for Sensing and Thinking, yet find yourself in a position that requires a lot of one-on-one counseling, you may want to seek out a position that allows you to conduct data analysis with an emphasis on the here and now, or even seek out these types of responsibilities within your current job. For example, I often work with career counselors who have preferences for ST, but their profession requires them to frequently use their non-preferred Intuition and Feeling functions. Although they usually report that they like their jobs overall, they also say their jobs are very draining and frustrating when they spend too many hours in a direct helping role. However, if they’re able to seek out activities that allow them to work within their natural preferences, such as analyzing career assessments, critiquing resumes, running the office operations or managing departmental technology, they can achieve a renewed enthusiasm for their roles. In general, if you can cherry pick enough activities that match your own preferences and integrate them into your daily role, you will be much more satisfied and energized in your current position.  Having the Patience to Work Your Way Up Sometimes there’s not an immediate solution because developing the skills and expertise to operate in certain roles takes time. If you have a preference for Thinking, for example, you may enjoy logical objective decision making, and like to look for what is wrong with the system so you can fix it. The question is, are you far along enough in your career to initiate and implement change? Let’s face it, most teams don’t take well to junior-level employees telling them what’s wrong with what they’re doing, regardless of how on-point their advice may be. In some cases, you may have to stick it out for a while, building your level of expertise and influence before you are able to take on more of a “fixer” role. You may experience frustration along the way, as you’ll likely witness incompetence in both leaders and peers that you would like to “fix,” but don’t have the power to do anything about it, yet. Instead, use your current position to gain the expertise and, eventually, the level of authority to implement change, so you can grow into a role that you’ll find very satisfying and allows you to do what comes most naturally.

Frustrated at Work Part II: Using Personality Type to Find a Better Role at Your Company

Innovative learning leaders have long advocated using social media to connect with students in our courses. These tools can help instructors be more present and relatable in the stream of students’ everyday activities and can help to continue conversations beyond the classroom or learning management system. But if communication on social media is primarily related to courses currently in session, the connection is likely to wear out its welcome once the course is over.How can you create a more enduring relationship with students and entice them to get excited about the full scope of your field? Many faculty members are creating websites that serve as portals to established and emerging work. They are curating a wide range of resources and activities in an area of particular interest and showcasing those materials in a way that draws people in. A blog, Twitter feed, or Facebook page can further engage people in conversation about mutual interests.Through a web presence, you can demonstrate your own enthusiasm for the field, sharing as much as you like about what intrigues you and about what others are currently researching and discussing. Students appreciate that because it helps them see possibilities beyond coursework and imagine how they, too, might have longer-term interests in a field, as either a career or an ongoing area of interest. There is another advantage: A website and broad social media presence showcase your interests to a wider audience, potentially attracting other students, professionals, and fellow academics to your work, establishing a line of communication that is more open than typical publishing channels. Here are a few strategies to consider:A personal interests site. Create a website that highlights your own research interests and publications. You also can use it to curate supplemental resources or material for courses you teach. Here you have the opportunity to not only link to your published work, but also provide a synthesis that brings various strands together and incorporates them with other work in the field. An ongoing blog can allow you to share reactions to emerging research and seek input for your own nascent ideas. A department website. Use your department’s webpages to showcase the strength of your program, highlighting how courses are tied together and the competencies students develop through your curriculum. Showcase the faculty’s academic and professional work, and provide students with links to professional organizations, ongoing research, and events that might interest them. Your department blog might contain a mix of thought-provoking ruminations on relevant topics, news about ongoing course activities, reports of new research, and announcements about industry events. Giving students a voice on the blog might generate even deeper interest.A collaborative site. Join up with other faculty members inside and outside your institution to build a site that focuses on a particular research thread or theoretical base. The site could collate published articles on a topic and provide a broad overview of models and recommendations based on that research. Collaborators might use blogging and commenting features to exchange ideas and demonstrate how ideas are debated and refined. I have described the process of building such sites as learning environment design. The process includes envisioning your goals and strategy, finding relevant resources, curating the resources and activities that you want to recommend, assembling everything for easy access, and continuously cultivating the site to keep it fresh and to develop a community. Website-building tools available through WordPress, Google Sites, and other providers make creating these kinds of sites easier than ever before. If you aspire to incite students’ imaginations about the full scope of a field and encourage them to dig deeper even after grades are finalized, creating something of more enduring reach may be an important strategy.

Search results for 'Catherine King'

Categories

Refine By