Multilitteratus Incognitus

Another story I had in my Pocket account (for what seems like forever) is this story from campus technology talking about how nano-degrees are disrupting higher education .  I don't know about you, but it seems to me that people just love the word disrupt , or the pairing disruptive innovation .  I have a feeling that in 10-15 years when we're past this fad we will look back at this time period with the same sense of nostalgia that we look upon movies made in the 80s (you know, all of the movies that have synth-music playing). Regardless of where you call it a nanodegree, an x-series set of courses, or a certificate this concept isn't new, and the article points to this fact that this isn't new. Certificates have been around for quite some time, and both higher education institutions and professional associations offer a wide variety of certification options for learners.  The professional associations, such as ATD or SHRM for example,  in theory, should have th...

When the Rhizo Team (well a subset of the Rhizo team) and I worked on the article Writing the Unreadable Untext for Hybrid Pedagogy we used Wordsworth's phrase “We murder to dissect”. If memory serves me right it was Sarah H. that initially brought this idea forward....or was it Keith? † That's the beauty of swarm writing, individual credit evaporates and it's what we accomplish together that feeds back to us as individuals. In any case, it is this phrase that came to mind as I was reading a story on Campus Technology titled New Registry Will Demystify Badges, Credentials and Degrees , where the main crux of the story is that academia and industry are teaming up to create a registry with the intent of demystifying the value of different degrees, credentials, certifications, and so on. From the new story: The registry "will allow users to easily compare the quality and value of workforce credentials, such as college degrees and industry certifications, using a...

I've been following an interesting discussion in one of the LinkedIn groups that I am a member of called " How important is a formal certificate/degree in Instructional Design to become a successful Instructional Designer? " I guess the discussion is not new (well it may be new to this group, but it's been going on in the ID circle for a while). There are pros and cons to each position, for example non-formal trained IDs (Instructional Designers) are seen are more creative and adaptive and in their mind formally trained IDs are a bit more rigid. At the other end of the spectrum, formally trained IDs see a formal education as "I know why this is happening and I can harness its power instead of relying on chance" and the degree of course can get them in the door whereas non-degreed IDs might have a problem with that. There are some comments which just derail the discussion like a commenter that said that she wants to see people rename IDs learning designers ...