Preparing for ICQI2010

I am preparing my 2 paper presentations for the Sixth International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, ICQI2010, and here are their abstracts as listed in the book of abstracts:

Keefer, Jeffrey M., Lancaster University
Learning Goals and Personal Learning in Practitioner Autoethnographic Inquiry: A Case Study

Autoethnography is an increasingly used method of inquiry in the social sciences that focuses upon an experience, or case, in the life of the researcher, who then studies this with the hope of presenting it with vivid and rich descriptive details. It is often intended that the reader be able to share in the experience, so the research is intentionally related to common cultural perspectives. There is limited research around why autoethnographers engage in this method, especially in the context of trying to better understand their goals and intentions for their own work, as well as what is hoped for within the audience. This exploratory case study research will explore the researcher’s learning goals for his or her readers, as well as how the researcher’s own learning develops through the process of conducting the autoethnographic research.

Keefer, Jeffrey M., Lancaster University
The Design and Initial Development of an eLearning Course to Organize and Frame a Qualitative Research Design: The Learning Qualitative Project

There is increasing attention to the challenges faced by faculty who teach qualitative research method courses. Whether lecturers do not have sufficient background to teach in this area, students are not ready to take these courses or their expectations differ from what is taught, logistical institutional factors inhibit teaching and learning, or challenges in the theory-practice relationship pose struggles to coursework, the struggles with teaching qualitative methods seem nearly endless (Hurworth, 2008). With so much need, it was decided to create a freely available eLearning course to assist faculty and students alike. A qualitative research design eLearning course was developed to address some of the basic elements of a research design, and the first version of this is being tested with feedback being used to improve the course’s usefulness.

Hope to see some colleagues, old and new, later this week!

QI2010 Preliminary Program

The preliminary PDF program for the 6th International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry (QI2010) is available on their website. If you take a look at it, you will see my 2 abstracts that were accepted:

The Design and Initial Development of an eLearning Course to Organize and Frame a Qualitative Research Design: The Learning Qualitative Project, Jeffrey M. Keefer, Lancaster University

Learning Goals and Personal Learning in Practitioner Autoethnographic Inquiry: A Case Study, Jeffrey M. Keefer, Lancaster University

 I am flying into Indianapolis and then driving the distance. Anybody want to split the ride?


Re-Thinking E-Learning Research (free) Seminar at SCoPE

Rethinking E-Learning ResearchI just learned about a new 3-week online seminar that just began at SCoPE: Re-Thinking E-Learning Research. I purchased this text after reading about it earlier in the year, and this is a great opportunity to begin reading it, especially given that my doctoral studies are in E-Research and Technology Enhanced Learning. As I take such a broad view of what elearning and e-research are, this session may be just the thing I am looking for.

I am really interested in the 3 topics that will be covered and discussed:

  1. Introduction to e-learning research: What is it? Where are we?
  2. Narrative: What is the case for narrative methods in e-learning research?
  3. Critical Theory: How can methodologies associated with critical theory contribute to the field of e-learning research?

Perhaps I will see some of my colleagues online during this event, and we can experience how all this works within an online community of practice as well!

eLearning with Adobe Captivate 4

While I often use my blog to discuss research projects related to my doctoral studies or related conference / publication work, one aspects of my professional involvement may come as a surprise to some. I work as a project manager and instructional designer, though I also increasingly engage in eLearning.

captivate 4eLearning and I have a mixed relationship, as often I find it either too involved or not involved enough. As I am currently finishing a short piece on critical thinking–Critical Thinking and the Information You Need. With the purpose of the module being an introduction to critical thinking for doctoral students, I am building this with Adobe Captivate 4 and will publish this as an executable file, so to avoid the possible technical issues that arise with various versions of Flash player. 

It is a lot easier to engage in eLearning when it is a topic I am interested in, that is for certain!

Learning 2.0 = ROI?

It seems the discussion that has been going on (cf. Gina, among others), on where Learning 2.0 is (and I recently posted about this with some very inciteful comments). Her last post, and my response to Jim Groom on his reaction to my thoughts has me going in a new direction.

With talk about Web 2.0 and Learning 2.0 and Academic vs (&?) Corporate use of individual and engaging learning applications, I am now thinking about the cost issues and ROI.

Now, take a deep breadth — I am not a proponent of measuring ROI, especially with applications that are difficult to even explain to the uninitiated newbies. But, if I wanted to (read between the lines — perhaps my organization won’t do anything without an ROI study), what could I do? It is already enough of a challenge to demonstrate how any expenditure can provide an ROI, especially after Corporate America (to limit my sweeping statement a bit) lost its shirt in the rush to embrace all things eLearning a few years back. With those calculations out the window as really involved and interactive elearning takes much longer to develop (and thus determine its ROI), as per Bryan Chapman whose blog post lists these amounts (which I am reproducing from his ASTD 2008 presentation handout, which he claimed during his session was a bit outdated):

34:1 Instructor-Led Training (ILT), including design, lesson plans, handouts, PowerPoint slides, etc.

33:1 PowerPoint to E-Learning Conversion. Not sure why it takes less time then creating ILT, but that’s what we discovered when surveying 200 companies about this practice

220:1 Standard e-learning which includes presentation, audio, some video, test questions, and 20% interactivity

345:1 Time it takes for online learning publishers to design, create, test and package 3rd party courseware

750:1 Simulations from scratch. Creating highly interactive content

then what do we do?

If we have enough trouble determining pure ROI (meaning a financial return, not the unmeasurable peace of mind knowing the new orientees get the approved HIPAA training and nothing else), then how on earth can we measure successful implementation of Learning 2.0?

Now, off to go and Tweet about this now.