Coffee fuelled brains – explains media hyperbole?

A new study published today suggests that drinking five cups of coffee a day could reverse memory problems seen in Alzheimer's disease. But actually it doesn’t. The article on the BBC website goes on to report:

"This research in mice suggests that coffee may actually reverse some element of memory impairment.

"However much more research is needed to determine whether drinking coffee has the same impact in people.

"It is too soon to say whether a cup of coffee is anything more than a pleasant pick me up."

So the effect of this reportage is misleading. The headline is memorable (“Coffee ‘may reverse Alzheimer’s’”) which is at odds with the detail at the end of article. The behavioural take away is more than likely “I know, I’ll make sure I drink more coffee” legitimising an existing habit based on largely unproven evidence. At least this report nullified itself in one place, rather than selectively quoting from a study to support its own baseless argument.

I’m picking on coffee in this instance, but this is just one of many examples where the media report on research studies exaggerating the conclusions and leading with speculation.

That said, there are exciting developments in the field of neuroscience and our understanding of brain chemistry that should lead to genuine treatments and supplements that support memory and improve our capacity to learn faster and perform more effectively.

A diet of HDL cholesterol, blueberries and coffee may be part of the answer. But beware you don’t still end up doing stupid things albeit faster and with more energy.

Learning the LINGO

I had the privilege of speaking at the INGO E-learning Conference at Oxfam House, Oxford today. Fellow speakers included Clive Shepherd, Jane Hart and Rob Hubbard. There is a growing interest amongst charities and other non governmental organisations in more effective and efficient approaches to learning and development. When you have staff, volunteers and other representatives spread across the globe, often in hard to reach areas with little infrastructure and tight budgets it can be a real challenge to provide sufficient training support. E-learning is clearly of value in these situations but also it has to be flexible in its design and delivery to avoid just becoming an expensive white elephant.

Talking of elephants, I gave the audience the benefit of my “elephant in the training room” message – that despite best efforts, much training is delivered by the wrong people, to the wrong people, at the wrong time in the wrong way. What is the result? No learning, no value gained by the individual or the organisation they serve. E-learning is no different – too much of what people experience is plain dull, ironically hard to access and use and similarly lacks relevance. Design is crucial to the success of a learning experience, online or offline. This does not necessarily mean spending large amounts of money on high production values (although that can be sensible and appropriate). Instead, it is developing a more elusive skill – smart selection of design treatments/concepts, clear, energising writing and the appropriate use of media that fit within your project constraints (time, budget, technical).

I used my IMPACT framework to illustrate how e-learning design can be more effective and impactful than the “slide-ware” many people default to creating and even more people have to endure. We can all do much better than this and I’m optimistic that as technology supported learning becomes ever more mainstream, good design will be recognised and valued. After all, the objective is to change attitudes and behaviour in our learners for the long term – and that’s worth dedicating the right level of investment of skill and resource to achieve isn’t it?

LSG 2010 - Elvis comes to mind

As the King put it:

"A little less conversation, a little more action please"

That pretty much summed up the reactions to many of the sessions during what was a vibrant and buzzy event this Tuesday in London. While there was much enthusiasm demonstrated with regards to the future potential of simulations, the shifts in informal/formal learning provision and a welcome emphasis on long term retention (my long time favourite Ebbinghaus), I sensed a bit of a disconnect between theoretical vision and practical application.

It's important that we try and share more concrete examples where possible and demonstrate real examples in action - as this I think makes it more tangible and achievable. There continues to be more than a little ironic that these sessions are delivered in a lecture format, with powerpoint and limited levels of interaction.

The most valued aspects was the informal conversation between sessions - a common aspect of most conferences and traditional training sessions. So it would be good to find an even better balance that creates even more opportunities for the LSG (and wider L&D community) to connect, communicate and collaborate.

In that sense, the King was not quite as visionary: this new social media driven world tends to favour conversation - but it should not be at the expense of action - and ultimately productivity and performance.

For an alternative take, check out Cheryl's blog post of the event to learn more about frogs (!).