We all agree on the power of social learning. If teams are going to improve, they need to improve together. Yet, we continually hear of three problems within online learning experiences. 1. Accountability: Learners struggle to complete learning/training modules. Why are people disengaged and dropping out?   2. Implementation: There is a gap between training (learning) and action. How can I improve the ROI from our training efforts?   Why is it that those who complete learning experiences struggle to take action and apply their learning?   3. Community: Learning is usually set up as an isolating experience supplemented by Zoom or face-to-face meetings to try to share - which seldom provide the time and space to give a voice to each learner and provide deeper, more actionable sharing and feedback. How can I create experiences that help turn my teams into Communities of Practice where they interact, collaborate, and learn from each other? These 3 problems are related. Take a look at wh

We often have conversations from those looking to innovate learning. They want to learn more about Huddle Up to see if it's the right fit for their organization. We summarized a few of the important differences to help outline the difference. Take a look. We'd love to hear from you.   Contact us to let us know what you think. Is Huddle Up The Best Fit For You? Below, we have provided a quick comparison. You can also learn more about how L&D innovators and educators are using Huddle Up to engage their teams in collaborative experiences. What are your beliefs around organizational learning? Huddle Up can do these…  but it’s best suited for  →  Fully Leverage The Huddle Up Model PASSIVE LEARNERS Users complete tasks and demonstrate success by passing quizzes, summarizing, and completing comprehension exercises. LEARNERS TAKE ACTION Learners apply knowledge and skills in creative ways that demonstrate success if solutions are deemed high quality by their peers and experts.

Today's learners are ready to move past passive models. We know we need to structure engaging, action-based learning environments - think "work-embedded learning" with a focus on creating products and solutions. These environments are naturally rooted in action, but that doesn't necessarily make them examples of collaborative learning. Or, vice versa. This is a key distinction for those that want to innovate the way their teams and organizations want to learn Collaborative learning is defined by trying to enhance learning by working together. But these collaborative experiences don’t necessarily have to be active. For example, we could study for a exam, which is collaborative but will result in no truly active element. It’s aim is comprehension and understanding. Action-based learning provides learners with an experience in a setting where they are required to go beyond simple comprehension and put what they are learning into practice. Action-based learning is contras

We're excited to share a few clips from a recent discussion we had with PYP Coordinator Malika Meidinger on her take-aways from her school's use of Huddle Up Learning so far.  Malika started the year using Huddle Up. Malika had pretty bold preliminary goals for the year for her Lower School Faculty team. 1) Provide an online experience for her team to go through a transparent orientation process where her team can access resources yearlong and make the team's progress transparent to everyone. 2) Provide an experience that will last throughout the year where her team can be introduced to best practices regarding shared initiatives/goals - and allow each team member to share evidence of actual implementation / application of those best practices. 3)  Allowing peers to see each other's applications (solutions) and share feedback with each other in order to foster individual and team improvement - while making sure everyone on the team is "on the same page". 4) Bu

I like to talk to people about what systems, structures, and platforms they use to help their teams collaborate, learn, and problem-solve.  It doesn't really matter if I'm talking with trainers, consultants, or educators. I usually hear something like this: "We have our (training) courses inside of  ( INSERT NAME OF LMS HERE) . And, then we collaborate every week on  ( INSERT ZOOM, SLACK, GOOGLE MEET, ETC) " When did we start thinking / saying this?  Was this a prevalent phrase pre-pandemic? I don't remember hearing it then. (Perhaps I wasn't listening.) It's certainly a common paradigm now. More importantly, what impact does its arrival have on the way we structure our team's environments? For starters, it brings up a few odd questions. Aren't we naturally better learners when we collaborate? Aren't we better collaborators when we're learning along the way? Don't we do one better when we incorporate the other? When we think of the syst

  We welcome feedback, questions, and insights on the piece below. We learn best when we learn together. Everyone is familiar with "form follows function".  When architects design a building, they begin that process by understanding the function - the purpose - of the building. So,it begs the question: What are the outcomes (the functions) we want from the learners who take part in the learning experiences we structure? We all know the typical answers to this question. "We want learners who..." take action by applying knowledge collaborate with others, sharing ideas and feedback feel part of a team who can learn from each other are accountable to themselves and others for learning and sharing Yet, it's ironic that we structure isolated learning in platforms that are largely content repositories, storing videos and PDFs mixed in with an occasional quiz. It's time we re-think how we deliver learning. We need to re-think our concept that learning and collabora