• Skip to navigation (Press Enter).
  • Skip to main content (Press Enter).
  • English Version
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • Activities
  • Publications
  • Talks
  • Contact
  • Search

  • Twitter Updates

    • Categories

      • events (32)
        • CfP (6)
        • conference (18)
        • learntec (1)
        • symposium (7)
      • project (30)
        • agent-dysl (2)
        • mature-ip (16)
        • mirror (1)
        • myui (1)
        • soprano (8)
        • universaal (3)
      • publications (13)
      • tools (2)
        • mediawiki (1)
      • topics (56)
        • aal (10)
        • adaptivity (1)
        • competencies (15)
        • context (10)
        • education (3)
        • elearning (12)
        • hr (11)
        • km (12)
        • maturing (20)
        • microlearning (1)
        • motivation (2)
        • ontology (10)
        • project management (1)
        • workplace learning (17)
    • Archive

      • July 2010
      • May 2010
      • February 2010
      • January 2010
      • November 2009
      • September 2009
      • May 2009
      • March 2009
      • December 2008
      • November 2008
      • October 2008
      • September 2008
      • June 2008
      • May 2008
      • April 2008
      • March 2008
      • February 2008
      • January 2008
      • November 2007
      • October 2007
      • September 2007
      • August 2007
      • June 2007
      • May 2007
      • March 2007
      • February 2007
      • January 2007
      • December 2006
      • October 2006
      • September 2006
      • August 2006
    • RSS My MATURE Project blog

      • Professional Knowledge Management Conference 2011 in Innsbruck - From Knowlegde to Action
      • Knowledge Maturing in Europe - results of a large European study
      • People Tagging demonstrator evaluation - the "simplicity is fabulous"
      • Summary of demonstrators and motivational design approach
      • Successful second MATURE Review
      • Two Portuguese companies join the associate partner network
      • Knowledge Management 3.0 @ Learntec 2010
      • Continuous Competence Development: MATURE @ Professional Training Facts 2009
      • Third MATURE newsletter published
      • Promoting a shared understanding of competencies - position statement at IEEE LTSC WG20 meeting in Stuttgart
    • Tags

      aal competence elearning enterprise20 hr km knowledge_management learning matureip mirror-ip ontology reflection scohrid soprano web20 web30

    Archive for the ‘mature-ip’ Category

    « Older Entries

    Workshop on Motivational and Affective Aspects of Technology-Enhanced Learning (MATEL 2010)

    Monday, May 31st, 2010

    Based on the experiences in MATURE, we are trying to form an interdisciplinary community around the topic of motivational and affective aspects in technology-enhanced learning. Towards that end, we are organizing a workhop (MATEL 2010) at this year’s edition of the ECTEL conference, which takes place in Barcelona, Spain.

    We invite contributions from the areas of psychology, sociology, computer science, CSCW, economics, among others.

    Tags: matureip
    Posted in CfP, elearning, mature-ip, motivation | No Comments »

    What indicators and other management instruments might have to do with knowledge (maturing)

    Friday, November 20th, 2009

    While MATURE has always been inspired by bottom-up developments (and the concept of knowledge maturing has this an inherent assumption), we have always emphasized the importance of top-down activities as well. We have avoided to use the term “management” here, but rather used the term guidance for that. So far, we have mainly concentrated on value-based and valuation-based guidance (showing by appreciation what is considered good practice, which is usually subsumed in a notion of team/corporate culture), and structural guidance (i.e., the establishment and nurturing of communication structures). Furthermore, we have been struggling with potentials and dangers of incentive structures, mainly monetary/material and career incentives.

    This week we were at the Professional Training Facts 2009 in Stuttgart (see here for a summary of MATURE activities at this event). This was a great opportunity to think and discuss about topics around competence development in company. One trend I have spotted was the increasing importance of indicators for competence development and the incorporation of those indicators into management instruments like management-by-objectives. At first sight, this always seems to be a good idea to “professionalize” the learning element in a company by making it measurable. This originates in the assumption that “you cannot manage what you cannot measure”, which is probably true when you want to manage things. The approach promises transparency and can be a step towards calculating an ROI for learning. The big problem, however, does not lie in the approach of defining indicators and measuring them, but rather in the concrete indicators themselves. These indicators do not naturally naturally derive from the topic at hand, but are actually always bound to a notion of an ideal state; they contain the statement: you should have a high score in this indicator – this would be the best option. This is not bad as such, but this fact is rarely reflected, especially because this ideal state is actually context-dependent. It can be different for large vs. small organizations, for innovation-focused vs. efficiency-focused organizations, for service vs. production etc. What happens is that somebody defines (probably with good reasons) a certain set of indicators, and other simply take those indicators and apply them without questioning their value for their context.

    What does this have to do with knowledge and knowledge maturing? This has three aspects:

    • This “ideal state” conception as such is a body of knowledge, and it has to be carefully examine if the underlying knowledge about the ideal state is has reached a level of maturity that allows for a standardization in which you usually simply take things and apply them (like, e.g., for many financial indicators). Or if we are on a lower level of maturity and have to develop from there our own answer to the question “what is the ideal state”. In this learning and maturing process we have to learn about the contextual factors that differentiate us from others. And even if we take and apply standardized things, we should allow and encourage questioning usefulness at any time.
    • Indicators are not only about measuring, they are about management and guidance. They aim at changing the behaviour by explicitly or implictly encouraging to become “better”. Even if we know sufficiently about the ideal state, do we know enough how a certain set of indicators (potentially tied together with a complex formula) influences the behaviour? Is our knowledge about that mature enough to make them the basis for formalized instruments (like reward schemes, but also career decisions)? Can we differentiate between correlations and causal relationships? Can we separate external factors? Or should be modest enough to consider them what they are: indicators that measure something, but not the wealth of reality, and use them as a reflection instrument – and in the end maybe come to the conclusion that they measure nothing of interest.
    • We are currently researching indicators for knowledge maturing both in the empirical and the technical-conceptual strand of the MATURE project. We should be aware that indicators always derive from a concept of ideal state, which is difficult to envision as a whole. So we will base those indicators based on our pre-conceptions (which has a lot to do with our value systems) – and we should carefully reflect on this problem.

    As a conclusion: measuring can be very helpful for many aspects, also on the soft side, but we should understanding the development and application of such measuring instruments as a collaborative learning process which should involve many. Then this process and its result can be also a good guidance instrument.

    Technorati-Tags: matureip

    Posted in hr, km, mature-ip, maturing, symposium | No Comments »

    Towards a shared understanding of competencies

    Monday, September 28th, 2009

    Today I was invited to a meeting of the IEEE LTSC WG20 for starting a liaison activity between the various stakeholders in competency-based data management. Its goal was to form a group for developing a shared conceptual model. I have presented a very brief summary of our work in that area:

    Competency Orientation within Companies: The Challenge of Different Requirements
    View more presentations from Andreas Schmidt.

    Here is also the position paper.

    One of my main points was that we need to look at the use cases and their specific requirements as many of the misunderstandings come from the implicit assumption of a certain use case. Our initial analysis of use cases is reported here:

    Simone Braun, Christine Kunzmann, Andreas Schmidt
    People Tagging & Ontology Maturing: Towards Collaborative Competence Management
    In: David Randall and Pascal Salembier (eds.): From CSCW to Web2.0: European Developments in Collaborative Design Selected Papers from COOP08, Computer Supported Cooperative Work vol. , Springer, 2010

    Some use cases, like people finding, only rely on very weak notions of interests, while others – like career planning and rewarding schemes – rely on sound competency definitions. This is very important to understand – because all of them tend to speak of competencies. This also helps to understand why in some cases >700 competencies are appropriate, and in others 20 might be sufficient.

    For a general conceptual model, I have pointed out the following challenges:

    • Competencies are cultural abstractions
    • Competency definitions are implicitly contextualized and a certain degree of ambiguity will always remain.
    • Competency definitions are purpose-driven conceptualizations
    • Competencies are time-dependent conceptualizations

    Posted in competencies, events, mature-ip | No Comments »

    I-KNOW 2009 & the first steps towards motivational design for informal learning tools

    Sunday, September 6th, 2009

    Last week we were at Graz, first for a MATURE Consortium Meeeting and then for the I-KNOW conference, which I always enjoy for its atmosphere. It is far more relaxed and suitable for networking with long lunch and coffee breaks in the afternoon. Unfortunately, the quality of the talks did not live up to my expectations  based on previous years’ experience (despite the fact that the MATURE project contributed 7 presentations and one poster presentation). This is strikingly similar to the WM 2009 in Solothurn. Is this a (rather alarming) indicator that traditional knowledge management forums do not attract the top research contributions? Or is the topic as such no longer fashionable?

    On the other side, the event hosted the kick-off event for the Special Interest Group on Professional Learning (www.sig-protel.eu), which tries to increase the visibility of the topic on a European level, first by better networking among the concerned European research projects like MATURE, APOSDLE, ROLE, and others. In the discussion, it has turned out that despite the ambiguity of the term, professional learning seems to be umbrella term for KM and workplace learning. This SIG is a promising sign for a maturing community.

    This year, Christine and I were giving a talk on integrating motivational aspects into the design of informal learning support, which reported on our findings on how to integrating motivational measures into tools for informal learning (the paper is available from here). Christine has done most of the work in ethnographic studies and their analysis. Currently, together with our colleague Athanasios, they are struggling to integrate their ideas into the four demonstrators of MATURE Year 2 demonstrators.

    Integrating Motivational Aspects into the Design of Learning Support in Organizations
    View more presentations from Andreas Schmidt.

    Technorati-Tags: matureip,motivation,iknow,km

    Posted in conference, hr, km, mature-ip, motivation, publications, workplace learning | No Comments »

    MATURE Project Coordination: Experiences from the 1st year

    Monday, May 11th, 2009

    It has been an exciting year, working as the scientific coordinator and (as Pablo Franzolini, the other part of the management team, likes to put it) the “moral authority” of the MATURE project. The team consists of more than 50 people from various background plus an additional group of associate partners of more than 30 organizations. This team is actually the best team I have ever experienced in a research project: highly motivated, creative, with renowned specialists in their field – and a team spirit. The coordination job does not become easy, but your effort becomes really rewarding. After 12 months, it is now time to reflect on it:

    Openness and participation vs. managing complexity. For MATURE, we have chosen from the beginning a very open collaboration style with other initiatives. Mainly through our associate partner network, we have established contacts with various companies, research institutions and other initiatives. This gives you the opportunity to discuss your ideas with many different people and collect various constraints and requirements from their practical experience. You can also start joint activities that yield mutual benefit to increase impact and quality. However, such an approach is always at the edge regarding complexity. An Integrating Project with around 50 active participants is already a complex environment, but the open approach that complexity with different timelines, different goal structures etc., which have to be aligned.

    Guidance according to the seeding-reseeding-evolutionary growth model. What is the role of a coordinator in such a project with high degrees of uncertainty? In “The Effective Executive” Drucker puts forward the main guiding question: “What contribution from me do you require to make your contribution?” So, a coordinator needs to act as a moderator of parallel strands of activities, giving guidance only where the lack of guidance would prevent people from making their contributions. Fischer’s SER model, which we have used for MATURE, seems to be a good model. It consists of three recurring phases in creative processes: seeding refers to given a group an initial starting point to start working on, evolutionary growth is the phase where the group develops their ideas without external intervention, and reseeding is an intervention in which the results of evolutionary growth are examined, pruned, and new input is provided to the group. We have used that paradigm both for the ethnographic study analysis, and especially for the use case development. In the latter case, groups of application and technical partners were asked to come up with use cases for technology support that improves knowledge maturing. The basis (=seeding) were the personas from the ethnographic studies and a framework for use case descriptions. After a phase of evolutionary growth, use cases were examined, clustered, merged and a refined description framework was given. The groups then worked on those use cases again. This has yielded very rich use cases and negotiated use cases (technically feasible, challenging from a research perspective, and based on needs of application partners).

    Role of collective sensemaking. In previous projects, I have already learned how important collective sensemaking is for a project’s coherence and building a real team. Sensemaking here mainly refers to making sense (in the large) out of what we do (or have done) in smaller-scale situations. For the degrees of freedom and the level of uncertainty in research projects, top-down planning (the “master plan”) is simply not appropriate:

    • Top-down planning usually provokes the “following a plan” behavior, taking care of your own activities only, rather than caring for the project as a whole. People usually feel that something is wrong with the master plan, but are not subversive enough to challenge it.
    • Top-down planning does not adequately reflect the learning process within the project team. Plan revisions are usually slow and cumbersome so that you rather stick to the old plan.
    • Top-down planning avoids team discussions and decisions what is right or best by choosing something mediocre. Following a plan is way easier than having a planning framework within which you can and have to do your own planning in cooperation with others that are related to your activities.

    A far better instrument than planning is the synchronization and coordination of activities through collective stories that bring together the individual pieces into a coherent whole. Such story building and collective sensemaking is a continuous process that is sufficiently agile to incorporate new insights and environmental changes, but ensures project coherence.

    Tags: matureip
    Posted in mature-ip, maturing, project management | No Comments »

    OnlineEduca Berlin 2008

    Saturday, December 6th, 2008

    On Thursday and Friday I had the opportunity to go to the OnlineEduca Berlin. It is a huge combined congress and fair with over 2.000 participants from more than 90 countries. For my taste, this is way too big – it creates an atmosphere of restlessness and anonymity where meeting people is possible, but you do not really feel like spending enough time on really exchanging ideas. Breaks are too short, sessions too many. But it appears that others do not share this opinion – otherwise they would not come to the event repeatedly.

    Well, apart from that, there were interesting keynotes on the first day: Michael Wesch, a anthropologist from Kansas presentedwho managed that his home-made YouTube video became an incredible success (and he has since then produced several interesting ones! – my colleague Valentin already recommended one of them in his recent blog entries), but also Norbert Bolz (who was less entertaining, but also had interesting ideas) like the importance of self-branding.

    While there was no single big conference theme, I gained the impression that the two big topics were serious games and (with some distance) mobile learning. There was some reference to personal learning environments (e.g., by Fronter) and the obligatory reference to Web 2.0,  but few consequences could be seen.

    I myself presented MATURE from an (almost) non-technical perspective, highlighting new approaches to guidance via the gardening metaphor and the necessity of a participatory culture:

    Additionally, Gilbert Peffer from CIMNE organized a session on serious games for the financial domain (both for private financial decisions and for professional trader training), and provided a possibility to look into the upcoming xDELIA project (where FZI a is also involved both from the sensor side and from the perspective of experimental economics).

    On the day before OnlineEduca, I participated in the ICOPER event on Competencies as the Currency for Learning, which aims at bootstrapping a standardization effort on competencies. More about that in the blog entry on the MATURE blog.

    Technorati-Tags: oeb08,onlineeducaberlin,matureip,icoper

    Posted in competencies, conference, education, elearning, hr, km, mature-ip, maturing, workplace learning | No Comments »

    Dave Snowden – and the ideas of MATURE

    Thursday, November 27th, 2008

    I just stumbled across Dave Snowden’s presentation at KM Asia 2008 in Singapore, and it was really surprising to see his three key principles of Social Computing, which ressemble a lot my vision for the MATURE project:

    • Distributed cognition
    • the wisdom and foolishness of crowds
    • top down stimulation of bottom up interaction
    • network capacity, but managed

    This is exactly what we intend to achieve by stimulating bottom-up activity and redefine guidance. Take our example of people-tagging: we use the tagging behavior for getting clues what are hot topic areas (and some indicators on who might know what). But we do not simply stay there, but rather apply the gardening metaphor: we need a manager who understands himself as a gardener, fostering growth, but also pruning, and cleaning up, seeding etc.

    • Disintermediation
    • connecting decision makers with raw data
    • enable understanding, allow action
    • empowerment & visibility

    So far this has not been that explicit for me, but that’s actually the mission of the guidance-related part of an Organizational Learning and Maturing Environment as we envision it: giving managers the opportunity to see and explore what’s going on. This way you avoid to depend on the analysis of someone else, increase the chance of serendipitous discovery.

    Posted in km, mature-ip, maturing | No Comments »

    AKWM Symposion 2008, Karlsruhe

    Friday, October 10th, 2008

    akwm-sym_banner-defaultYesterday, I was at this year’s edition of the AKWM Symposion, which is the yearly event of the Karlsruhe working group on knowledge management. The organizers always manage to find interesting speakers and presenters, among them the following:

    Wim Veen from TU Delft opened the day with his insights around the Homo Zappiens and highlighted the radical shifts difference in media exposure, consumption, and perception of children of the digital  age. In contrast to others, he viewed this change not as generally bad, but rather emphasized that multi-player games like World of Warcraft let’s children learn social collaboration behavior, and that parallel usage of different channels help to form the important skill of multitasking. He suggested that as parents and educators we should be less worried about the usage of computers, mobile phones, and other media devices, but rather immerse into those new environments to understand them better and to be able to provide guidance.

    Gabi Reinmann from University of Augsburg presented conceptual foundations for personal knowledge management based on her book “Wissenswege” (paths of/toward knowledge), which could be interesting to incorporate into the MATURE discussion on Personal Learning Environments  At the end of her talk she presented results from two studies on knowledge bloggers (researchers and teachers), whose emotional/motivational aspects could be crucial for the notion of PLEs, too: experience of competence, social integration, and autonomy. Particularly the latter one could be a challenges and source of conflict for PLEs within organizations – one example in the discussion mentioned that external blogging platforms are preferred over corporate blogging platforms because of the aspect of autonomy.

    Manfred Spitzer from the University Hospital Ulm gave a very inspiring talk on the neuropsychological insights of learning. Apart from the entertaining style of presentation, he was also able to communicate the key findings of neuropsychological research in recent years, e.g.,

    • the role of positive and negative emotions on learning effects: learning based on negative emotions (particularly fear) is very quick, but blocks any form of creativity; positive emotions can boost learning outcomes as it increases neural activity
    • the differences between children and adults: while learning can be very quick in childhood, adult learning is slower – which does not mean that one is better than the other

    Additionally, he had a very strong opinion on how the education system should look like and that modern media (like TV, but also computers) have a bad impact on the development of children. He suggested to expose children to the Internet after the age of 17, opposed the – it would have been interesting to have a panel discussion with Wim Veen. After all, I don’t think that there is any radical answer to the challenges of the digital age, neither protection against, nor uncriticial embracing of the “digital native” phenomenon. But another suggestion from him is definitely a good idea: evidence-based education and conducting more empirical educational research on the effectiveness of pedagogical concepts and methods.

    He has a similarly strong opinion on the use of Powerpoint (he opposed the fact that children at school are forced to use Powerpoint for their slides) – and cited the NASA Columbia accident assessment where Powerpoint-based communication was considered one of the causes. Well, probably he was one of the example that very good presenters do not need Powerpoint slides at all, but I would argue that the use of slides makes helps average and less-than-average presenters.

    As a replacement for Franz Reinisch, I had the opportunity to present MATURE as one of the key activities in the knowledge management field of the iRegion Karlsruhe. The presentation particularly highlighted the potential of the knowledge maturing approach to overcome the separation of knowledge management and learning.

    Hans-Peter Schnurr from Ontoprise and Prof. Rudi Studer from the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology and FZI moderated the session and gave an overview of the cluster initiative iRegion, aimed at fostering the IT cluster Karlsruhe (which is among the top 3 in Europe).

    Technorati-Tags: akwm,matureip,knowledge_management,km,education

    Posted in education, km, mature-ip, maturing, symposium | No Comments »

    ECTEL 2008 – "Time for Convergence" @ Maastricht

    Friday, September 19th, 2008

    This week I had the opportunity to attend the 3rd European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning at Maastricht in the Netherlands. It was a good networking opportunity for the TEL community, which some dubbed as a “big family” (with all the different aspects of a family). About 130 participants included mostly players from the European projects in the TEL area.

    There were some interesting key notes:

    • Kia Höök inspired the participants to consider the body and the affective dimension of human behavior in their research and development. I think that there is a huge potential, particularly if we want truly holistic and motivating/engaging learning experiences, although it is not easy to see how to transfer her research results, e.g., to workplace learning support. One step in that direction could be the upcoming Call 3 STREP xDELIA where my colleague Clemens van Dinther is involved in and which will deal with emotions.
    • Manu Kapur reported on his experiments on “productive failure”, which showed that students who fail in groups confronted with ill-structured problems outperform those who are successful in groups with well-structured problems even in well-structured problem domains. This implies that short-term failure may not be a reliable indicator for longer term learning success.

    ECTEL08 has given itself the mission “Time of convergence”, aiming at bridging different learning contexts. The discussions at the conference showed that convergence it still at its beginning. This manifested in the recurring debates about the role of informal learning and whether the TEL community should target that more (as APOSDLE and MATURE have started):

    • There was an increasing number of presentations and discussion contributions (e.g, from Graham Attwell as part of the MATURE PLE conceptualizations), including the keynote by Roy Pea who emphasized the role of informal learning compared to formal learning (e.g., only 5% of a student’s learning is within formal contexts).
    • On the other side, Pierre Dillenbourg doubted that this turn towards the “informal” is helpful for the TEL community (he still acknowledges the importance of informal learning) and suspects that this emerging shift of attention is because of frustration about not being able to change the formal system.
    • Rob Koper emphasized in the closing panel that if we want to have informal learning support, we should first work on the acknowledgment and valuing of informal activities in career development.

    The EC (represented by Pat Manson, Marco Marsella, and Martin Májek) explained that investments into TEL have so far not entered practice in a sufficient way. Stefanie Lindstaedt pointed out that industry could be faster to introduce workplace learning tools, but for that we need to provide evidence about the impact, and this can only be achieved if we do not focus on short term effects, but also on longer term effects.

    Also for MATURE, this was a good event. On the first day, MATURE presented the first results of the five months of the project and organized a workshop on Learning in Enterprise 2.0. This was a very good opportunity to bring together the different strands of development (ethnography, concept development, and technical integration of existing tools within design studies) in an open atmosphere and to receive feedback from the community. Additionally, Graham Attwell presented the rolling out of a first simple PLE based on Freefolio in the UK, which is closely linked to MATURE activities.

    Technorati tags: ectel08, matureip

    Posted in conference, elearning, mature-ip, publications, workplace learning | No Comments »

    Learning in Enterprise 2.0 Workshop and first MATURE results

    Tuesday, September 9th, 2008

    Next week, I will attend the ECTEL 2008 conference at Maastricht. Together with several others I am organizing the LEB 2008 workshop (Learning in Enterprise 2.0 and Beyond), which aims at exploring the implications of web 2.0 and e-learning 2.0 to learning in enterprises. This will also be a good opportunity to see the results of the first five months of the MATURE IP and to get into discussion with us:

    • Informal learner styles: Individuation, interaction, in-form-ation (Ronald Maier, Stefan Thalmann)
      This contributions presents an informal learning typology based on the first ethnographic study.
    • Concept of a Tool Wrapper Infrastructure for Supporting Services in a PLE (Tobias Nelkner, Wolfgang Reinhardt, Graham Attwell)
      The authors present further steps towards the notion of a personal learning environment in enterprises.
    • Ontologies, Dialogue and Knowledge Maturing: Towards a Mashup and Design Study (Andrew Ravenscroft, Simone Braun, John Cook, Andreas Schmidt, Jenny Bimrose, Alan Brown, Claire Bradley)
      This contribution introduces a design study of combining the SOBOLEO tool for supporting ontology maturing and the Interloc tool for argument games.

    Technorati tags: matureip, ectel08

    Posted in conference, elearning, mature-ip, maturing, workplace learning | No Comments »

    « Older Entries
    E-mail:  email address Contact information
    Copyright © 2010, Andreas Schmidt.