<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Here&#8217;s a Quick Way to Define Rapid E-Learning</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/</link>
	<description>Practical, real-world tips for e-learning success.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:47:37 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: tom</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-3569</link>
		<dc:creator>tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:50:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-3569</guid>
		<description>@David:  Here&#039;s the blog post with the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/what-can-you-learn-from-the-e-learning-community/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;winning definition&lt;/a&gt;, which is still open to debate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@David:  Here&#8217;s the blog post with the <a href="http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/what-can-you-learn-from-the-e-learning-community/" rel="nofollow">winning definition</a>, which is still open to debate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-3563</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:23:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-3563</guid>
		<description>Hi

I was wondering if you posted the winning definition for rapid eLearning?

If so where can it be found?

Thanks

David</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi</p>
<p>I was wondering if you posted the winning definition for rapid eLearning?</p>
<p>If so where can it be found?</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Why You Might Want to Consider Alan Burnham</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-2609</link>
		<dc:creator>&#187; Blog Archive &#187; Why You Might Want to Consider Alan Burnham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:53:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-2609</guid>
		<description>[...] Rapid eLearning Blog Comment - Scroll down to the August 31st, 2007 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Rapid eLearning Blog Comment &#8211; Scroll down to the August 31st, 2007 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: trisha kennedy</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-1022</link>
		<dc:creator>trisha kennedy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 15:54:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-1022</guid>
		<description>that was very nice</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>that was very nice</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tom</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-451</link>
		<dc:creator>tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 22:04:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-451</guid>
		<description>Good addition to the conversation.  We have the tools that allow for rapid production, we have a rapid prototyping process, we have the ability to deliver JIT training, etc.  It&#039;s clear why there are so many ways to see it and define it.  How about if we just dropped &quot;rapid&quot; and said elearning and then choose the best tools to complete the job?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good addition to the conversation.  We have the tools that allow for rapid production, we have a rapid prototyping process, we have the ability to deliver JIT training, etc.  It&#8217;s clear why there are so many ways to see it and define it.  How about if we just dropped &#8220;rapid&#8221; and said elearning and then choose the best tools to complete the job?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stilman</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-450</link>
		<dc:creator>Stilman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 21:45:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-450</guid>
		<description>&quot;Rapid elearning.&quot; Hmm...we have &#039;elearning&#039; and we have &#039;rapid,&#039; where &#039;rapid&#039; is an adjective that tells us what kind of elearning it is. Doesn&#039;t it follow that the correct structure, at least, of the definition must be &quot;Rapid elearning is elearning that is rapid&quot;? So once we have the definitions for &#039;elearning&#039; and &#039;rapid&#039; we simply insert them as:

&quot;Rapid elearning is [definition of elearning] that is [what is meant by &#039;rapid&#039;].&quot;

Do we really not know what the &#039;rapid&#039; means? Is it not obvious that it refers to rapid development? Why isn&#039;t the definition simply &quot;Rapid elearning is elearning that is built/created/produced rapidly&quot;? (take your pick on the verb, they all work).

Once we have that, it&#039;s really a question of what is &quot;elearning&quot;, is it not? And that seems to be where much of the divergence occurs in the submitted definitions (apart from the rapid development versus just-in-time discussion, of course). 

But are we really trying to debate and define &quot;elearning&quot;? Wouldn&#039;t that have been a blog discussion 5-8 years ago. You&#039;d think we are all more or less agreed as to what elearning is (though this survey tells us otherwise apparently). Yet much of the 5 final definitions try to describe elearning, and don&#039;t even do a very good job of that.

Take one of the five final definitions, for instance:
&quot;Rapid elearning delivers the right educational material at the right level at the right time to the right person in the right manner, with measurable results.&quot;

First of all, this is not really a definition. It does not say what it is, but rather what it does (or what we&#039;d like to think it does). Too picky? Perhaps, but if we can&#039;t be clear and accurate amongst ourselves...

Second, does that description (about delivering the right everything to the right everyone) even hint at anything that is &#039;rapid&#039; or that is &#039;elearning&#039;? Does it give any unique attributes to &#039;elearning&#039; or to &#039;rapid&#039;? You can quickly tell if a definition is not accurate if you can replace the term with another term and the definition still works (or works better, as it does in this case). You could insert &quot;Training&quot; or &quot;Instructional Design&quot; or &quot;The ADDIE Process&quot; and the definition makes more sense:

&quot;[Instructional design] delivers the right educational material at the right level at the right time to the right person in the right manner, with measurable results.&quot;

Or, to my point earlier, it should say &quot;The goal of Instructional Design is to deliver the right...&quot;

That definition is clearly for something much more broad than even &quot;elearning&quot;, much less &quot;rapid elearning&quot;.

This is why I prefer &quot;Rapid elearning is elearning that was created rapidly.&quot;

However, this doesn&#039;t capture all probably meanings because when we say &quot;rapid elearning&quot; we are not just referring to the thing as an object or end product that was built rapidly, we also see it as the process--how it was built. It&#039;s a development approach. That&#039;s why we can say, &quot;I&#039;m doing rapid elearning&quot; or &quot;this is a tool for rapid elearning.&quot; It seems we use &quot;rapid elearning&quot; as a verb, too.

To conclude, because I&#039;m not thrilled with any of the 5 final definitions, I&#039;ll suggest my own:

&quot;Rapid elearning is elearning that was developed in a much shorter period of time than has been typical. It also refers to the process or approach by which elearning is developed more quickly.&quot; And obviously, there are tools, such as Articuate, that endeavor to make such a process or approach possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Rapid elearning.&#8221; Hmm&#8230;we have &#8216;elearning&#8217; and we have &#8216;rapid,&#8217; where &#8216;rapid&#8217; is an adjective that tells us what kind of elearning it is. Doesn&#8217;t it follow that the correct structure, at least, of the definition must be &#8220;Rapid elearning is elearning that is rapid&#8221;? So once we have the definitions for &#8216;elearning&#8217; and &#8216;rapid&#8217; we simply insert them as:</p>
<p>&#8220;Rapid elearning is [definition of elearning] that is [what is meant by 'rapid'].&#8221;</p>
<p>Do we really not know what the &#8216;rapid&#8217; means? Is it not obvious that it refers to rapid development? Why isn&#8217;t the definition simply &#8220;Rapid elearning is elearning that is built/created/produced rapidly&#8221;? (take your pick on the verb, they all work).</p>
<p>Once we have that, it&#8217;s really a question of what is &#8220;elearning&#8221;, is it not? And that seems to be where much of the divergence occurs in the submitted definitions (apart from the rapid development versus just-in-time discussion, of course). </p>
<p>But are we really trying to debate and define &#8220;elearning&#8221;? Wouldn&#8217;t that have been a blog discussion 5-8 years ago. You&#8217;d think we are all more or less agreed as to what elearning is (though this survey tells us otherwise apparently). Yet much of the 5 final definitions try to describe elearning, and don&#8217;t even do a very good job of that.</p>
<p>Take one of the five final definitions, for instance:<br />
&#8220;Rapid elearning delivers the right educational material at the right level at the right time to the right person in the right manner, with measurable results.&#8221;</p>
<p>First of all, this is not really a definition. It does not say what it is, but rather what it does (or what we&#8217;d like to think it does). Too picky? Perhaps, but if we can&#8217;t be clear and accurate amongst ourselves&#8230;</p>
<p>Second, does that description (about delivering the right everything to the right everyone) even hint at anything that is &#8216;rapid&#8217; or that is &#8216;elearning&#8217;? Does it give any unique attributes to &#8216;elearning&#8217; or to &#8216;rapid&#8217;? You can quickly tell if a definition is not accurate if you can replace the term with another term and the definition still works (or works better, as it does in this case). You could insert &#8220;Training&#8221; or &#8220;Instructional Design&#8221; or &#8220;The ADDIE Process&#8221; and the definition makes more sense:</p>
<p>&#8220;[Instructional design] delivers the right educational material at the right level at the right time to the right person in the right manner, with measurable results.&#8221;</p>
<p>Or, to my point earlier, it should say &#8220;The goal of Instructional Design is to deliver the right&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>That definition is clearly for something much more broad than even &#8220;elearning&#8221;, much less &#8220;rapid elearning&#8221;.</p>
<p>This is why I prefer &#8220;Rapid elearning is elearning that was created rapidly.&#8221;</p>
<p>However, this doesn&#8217;t capture all probably meanings because when we say &#8220;rapid elearning&#8221; we are not just referring to the thing as an object or end product that was built rapidly, we also see it as the process&#8211;how it was built. It&#8217;s a development approach. That&#8217;s why we can say, &#8220;I&#8217;m doing rapid elearning&#8221; or &#8220;this is a tool for rapid elearning.&#8221; It seems we use &#8220;rapid elearning&#8221; as a verb, too.</p>
<p>To conclude, because I&#8217;m not thrilled with any of the 5 final definitions, I&#8217;ll suggest my own:</p>
<p>&#8220;Rapid elearning is elearning that was developed in a much shorter period of time than has been typical. It also refers to the process or approach by which elearning is developed more quickly.&#8221; And obviously, there are tools, such as Articuate, that endeavor to make such a process or approach possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shane</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-449</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 17:27:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-449</guid>
		<description>Tom, I&#039;m 35 and I remember green screen computers! We are indeed in for some cool stuff down the road.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom, I&#8217;m 35 and I remember green screen computers! We are indeed in for some cool stuff down the road.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tom</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-447</link>
		<dc:creator>tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 15:49:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-447</guid>
		<description>People took classroom training concepts and applied them online.  Some of that was because those who understood the technology to build courses weren&#039;t the ones who knew how to teach.  Now the tools are in the hands of people who can influence the learning process better.  The REL technology is only going to become more sophisticated and with that we&#039;ll see an evolution in the design of elearning since we&#039;ll be less dependent on programmers.  Remember the internet just ten years ago.  All gray and white pages with some pixelated graphics?  The way I see it we&#039;re in the gray web page era of rapid e-learning:)  There&#039;s some cool stuff down the road.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People took classroom training concepts and applied them online.  Some of that was because those who understood the technology to build courses weren&#8217;t the ones who knew how to teach.  Now the tools are in the hands of people who can influence the learning process better.  The REL technology is only going to become more sophisticated and with that we&#8217;ll see an evolution in the design of elearning since we&#8217;ll be less dependent on programmers.  Remember the internet just ten years ago.  All gray and white pages with some pixelated graphics?  The way I see it we&#8217;re in the gray web page era of rapid e-learning:)  There&#8217;s some cool stuff down the road.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Becvar</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-445</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Becvar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-445</guid>
		<description>I agree with Rissa&#039;s first comment that some people are confusing Rapid e-Learning with Just-in-Time e-Learning. But as Tom said, some people are using Rapid e-Learning tools to develop Just-in-Time training. But they are two distinct items.

For me, rapid e-learning is about the tools used to develop the e-learning solution and the process that supports using those tools.

In traditional Computer-Based Training (CBT) development, an instructional designer works with a subject matter expert to create storyboards for a course in MS Word or Powerpoint.  They send the completed storyboards to a developer who follows the storyboards to create interactive training using a product such as ToolBook, Authorware, or Flash. Today, a WBT can also be custom developed with HTML, XML. JavaScript, and CSS. Many organizations built their own &quot;engine&quot; that would provide much of the foundation such as navigation, bookmarking, and testing functions that reduced the level of effort required to develop training. Even if the developer had access to a library of widgets, the course would require some custom programming.  

Rapid e-Learning products like Articulate provide a pre-built template and interface that handles all of the issues related to navigation, LMS tracking, and interactions. When you move from the traditional tools to a product such as Articulate, the instructional designer and subject matter experts can design the course in PowerPoint. They can use Articulate Engage and Quizmaker to create interactive presentations and quizes. When done, they can publish the content for the internet without needing the programmer to get involved. This saves a major step in the development process which is why it is more rapid.

The fact that you are developing the training with a rapid e-learning development tool does not mean that you should also shortcut the instructional design process.  You still need to design training that meets the needs of your client and their learners.  Remember, one poorly designed training program can turn a student off from future e-learning courses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Rissa&#8217;s first comment that some people are confusing Rapid e-Learning with Just-in-Time e-Learning. But as Tom said, some people are using Rapid e-Learning tools to develop Just-in-Time training. But they are two distinct items.</p>
<p>For me, rapid e-learning is about the tools used to develop the e-learning solution and the process that supports using those tools.</p>
<p>In traditional Computer-Based Training (CBT) development, an instructional designer works with a subject matter expert to create storyboards for a course in MS Word or Powerpoint.  They send the completed storyboards to a developer who follows the storyboards to create interactive training using a product such as ToolBook, Authorware, or Flash. Today, a WBT can also be custom developed with HTML, XML. JavaScript, and CSS. Many organizations built their own &#8220;engine&#8221; that would provide much of the foundation such as navigation, bookmarking, and testing functions that reduced the level of effort required to develop training. Even if the developer had access to a library of widgets, the course would require some custom programming.  </p>
<p>Rapid e-Learning products like Articulate provide a pre-built template and interface that handles all of the issues related to navigation, LMS tracking, and interactions. When you move from the traditional tools to a product such as Articulate, the instructional designer and subject matter experts can design the course in PowerPoint. They can use Articulate Engage and Quizmaker to create interactive presentations and quizes. When done, they can publish the content for the internet without needing the programmer to get involved. This saves a major step in the development process which is why it is more rapid.</p>
<p>The fact that you are developing the training with a rapid e-learning development tool does not mean that you should also shortcut the instructional design process.  You still need to design training that meets the needs of your client and their learners.  Remember, one poorly designed training program can turn a student off from future e-learning courses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Norman Lamont</title>
		<link>http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-443</link>
		<dc:creator>Norman Lamont</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2007 07:46:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/heres-a-quick-way-to-define-rapid-e-learning/#comment-443</guid>
		<description>As Tom says, I didn&#039;t mean that not using ADDIE was a bad thing. I&#039;ve been a customer to a few companies developing with ADDIE as well as a developer and I&#039;ve never been convinced about the strict &#039;sign off this stage before moving on&#039; approach, for a number of reasons. And I&#039;ve usually found that the nearer you come to the deadline, the less strictly it&#039;s followed. So REL may be a recognition that progress can be made on the basis of prototyping and trust. The approach I&#039;m taking (as a corporate in-house developer) is to create templates that embody some elements of instructional design and coach subject experts to use them, in the hope that some will be able to produce good material by themselves. We just work with text and graphics, no audio or video so it&#039;ll be easier for us than some of you. I&#039;ve written on my own blog about a possible &#039;minimum level&#039; of ID. I&#039;d also characterise REL as a willingness to say &#039;yes, a single page or a short non-interactive page-turner might be sufficient here&#039;, which chimes with Rissa&#039;s point about JIT.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Tom says, I didn&#8217;t mean that not using ADDIE was a bad thing. I&#8217;ve been a customer to a few companies developing with ADDIE as well as a developer and I&#8217;ve never been convinced about the strict &#8217;sign off this stage before moving on&#8217; approach, for a number of reasons. And I&#8217;ve usually found that the nearer you come to the deadline, the less strictly it&#8217;s followed. So REL may be a recognition that progress can be made on the basis of prototyping and trust. The approach I&#8217;m taking (as a corporate in-house developer) is to create templates that embody some elements of instructional design and coach subject experts to use them, in the hope that some will be able to produce good material by themselves. We just work with text and graphics, no audio or video so it&#8217;ll be easier for us than some of you. I&#8217;ve written on my own blog about a possible &#8216;minimum level&#8217; of ID. I&#8217;d also characterise REL as a willingness to say &#8216;yes, a single page or a short non-interactive page-turner might be sufficient here&#8217;, which chimes with Rissa&#8217;s point about JIT.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
