Posted 8:08 AM by George Siemens
I was speaking with a student yesterday who was frustrated at her inability to perform a particular task. Our ensuing discussion brought concepts of effort and ability to the forefront.

Most of us evaluate ourselves by our ability...this is especially true in the field of technology. An instructor who is not very comfortable with technology labels him/herself as incapable of moving resources online ("I hate technology"). A student who has difficulty grasping a critical learning concept exclaims "I can't get this stuff...I'm not good at math (or English, or whatever)". Implied in each statement is the notion that we are somehow unable to alter our areas of knowledge deficiency...so before we start learning something new, past failures override even our attempts.

Evaluating our skills based on ability is wrong. Ability is an outcome of effort. If we evaluate ourselves by ability, rather than by effort, we will be reluctant to take new risks/challenges/learning opportunities. Just because a person is not familiar with HTML today (i.e. ability), does not mean he/she cannot learn the skills (effort) to be proficient in the future. Often, however, we fail to see that the reason we lack ability in an area is because we have only put in minimal effort.

As educators, our goal needs to be to teach students about the value of effort. Skill sets and knowledge are changing so rapidly that ability today is obsolescence tomorrow. The only way to meet future challenges is to ingrain in students the impact of effort...those math/English/computer skill deficiencies can be translated to abilities by effort.

We do a great disservice to students (and ill-prepare them for the future) if we train them to value abilities to over effort. Our competence in most areas is directly related to "time on task". This critical concept should be communicated to students so they feel capable of meeting the challenges of an increasingly complex world - effort creates abilities.

Posted 7:43 AM by George Siemens
Componentization
Quotes: "That's why we need a simple tool for e-learning access, a simple API or protocol that can be easily adapted by developers, that provides people with a view of the entire learning object sphere. Until such a thing exists, the whole field of learning objects dies stillborn, a great idea that nobody could use... breakthroughts we need are in this description: multiple instances of essential components - to avoid bottlenecks, standards tolerance - to ensure interoperability, smart learning objects - to ensure simplicity, browsing tools - to ensure usability"

Posted 7:27 AM by George Siemens
Learning Object Primer...from e-Learning Guru
In today's newsletter, Kevin Kruse offers some great starter resources on learning objects:

1. A Primer on Learning Objects
   
2. (Learning) Objects of Desire: Promise and Practicality
   
3. Do You Really Need Reusability?
   
4. Where Have all the Legos Gone?
   
5. Being Objective (Part 1)
   
6. Being Objective (Part 2)
   
7. SCORM Odyssey
   
8. Making Sense of Learning Specifications (.pdf)
   
9. Official SCORM Website
   
10. Learning Technology Standards: The Inflection Point of the New Learning and Knowledge Economy?
    
    

Noticable article missing: Learning Objects...one of the most thorough articles I've come across on the subject. See also elearnspace's resource page on Learning Objects