IC2, we've come to an end :-) Fingers crossed for the result ...

#telic1 adventures continues next schoolyear. Here's my assignment - project report.

de Caluwé & Vermaak:

Interesting colour test for change agents:

http://hansvermaak.com/blog/publicaties/the-color-test-for-change-agents/

With my report deadline coming up, I started listing my references. One book I've not mentioned is "Making Sense of Change Mangement" by Esther Cameron & Mike Green. I find it particularly interesting because it is a very readable, practical but theoretically underpinned book on a variety of frameworks and models about change and transformation.

What did I select from this book for my change project?

The work of Carl Rogers.

Carl Rogers is one of the founders of the humanstic movement. Rogers (1967) highlighted three conditions for development for individuals within organisations:

• genuineness and congruence: to be aware of your feelings, to be real, to be authentic. "The more genuine and congruent the change agent is in the relationship, the greater the probability of change in the personality of the client." (Cameron & Green, p.50)
  I focused on this condition in my approach for the project.
• Unconditional positive regard: an acceptance of whatever feelings are going inside the members of the change project. I can honestly say that the teachers involved in the project can have mixed or negative, or positive feelings towards the innovation.
• Empathic understanding: I understand the conditions that the teachers have to work in, and I "see" them as they are. I am aware of my own perceptions as a change agent; my past-driven realities do not influence my relation to the other (Presencing, Scharmer, 2002)

Schein's elaboration of Lewin's model

According to Schein (2006) three stages occur in change:

1. unfreezing: creating the motivation to change;

2. learning new concepts and new meanings from old concepts;

3. internalizing new concepts and meanings.

It looks like 1 and 2 are going OK in my project, 3 is something else ...

Team change

What is a group, and when is it a team?

Morgan et al (1986) suggest that 'a team is a distinguishable set of two or more individuals who interact interdependently and adaptively to achieve specified, shared, and valued objectives.' Groups, on the other hand, are a collection of individuals who draw a boundary around themselves. A team is, generally, toghter and clearer on its common purpose (Cameron & Green, 2012).

> It is good to think about and analyse this some more. I have a mix of "a group", and some are "parallel teams". Parallel teams are not part of the traditional management hierarchy, they run parallel to the existing structures. The setting of the micro-design teams in my project are setup like this.

I'm listing all of my references in this googledoc. The research tool is great for automatically listing your references.

An important element in the current IC2 module is learning through reading. We received a good short-list with resources on change management and innovation. I took off in these posts with thoughts on my reading:

Amazing to realise what already has been written, published on “change management”! Quite impossible to get acquainted with everything in my limited time, I would say…

It looks like a lot of people are learning about change. It seems that everybody is concerned with wanting people to change. Why is that? Is it a kind of quest for the holy grail of control? If and when we understand how change works, then we can influence how humans change. And, ultimately, we have control over what happens; we have guarantees that innovations are effectively realised? According to me there is a paradox in the notion of “change management”: is it possible to “manage” “change”, or is this an unchangeable process?

Anyway, I go on reading and add my own contributions to the 1.3 mio google searches: I gathered my resources for reading in this googledoc. Handy research feature in googledocs by the way…

I am currently reading Can You Teach a Caterpillar to Fly by Jan Bommerez.  I was intrigued by the white-print thinking of de Caluwé and Vermaak. "In white-print thinking, the dominant image is that everything is changing autonomously. It is nourished by chaos thinking. Where there is energy, things change. White denotes openness."

I had the book of Jan Bommerez for some time on my book-shelf but this tweet triggered my reading it.

“Vasthouden heeft altijd te maken met weerstand …” RT @janbommerez #loslaten http://t.co/f34BMhYSE4 pic.twitter.com/uY97GmFD0F

— Bram Bruggeman (@brambruggeman) May 1, 2014

"Retaining always has to do with resistance"

Jan Bommerez on co-intelligence:

Our main assessment task in IC2 is a change project in our workplace. The project I chose was the professional development of a group of about 15 teachers on blended pedagogy using ICT.  The context of the project, goals and project plan in this googledoc.

A visual representation of the timeplan:

The ideas behind my approach are:

• Providing inspiration to a big group of teachers, make people enthousiastic for blended pedagogy and ICT in education (curiosity);
• from that large group, establish an engaged team of teachers (connectivity);
• contact session 1 to form teams, gather ideas and expectations, and to get to know one another (trust, connectivity);
• provide distance learning objects for people to professionally develop skills on variety tools that were selected in group;
• contact session 2 for further development of skills and pedagogic design of assignments;
• evaluating change in a closing session (tenacity).

We are now mid-way. The tools and assignments were provided on this blog, and we come together again on May 15th.

As diagnosis of change in this project I created a force-field analysis. A force-field analysis maps the factors that influence a situation. Helping forces and hindering forces of the change process.

My force-field analysis:

Reflecting mid-way on this process, it seems that the inhibiting forces of “time” are winning. There are little communicative signs that prove their learning with the distance learning assignments. We decided to use twitter as a tool for communication and questions but I’ve only spotted a couple of tweets with the appointed hashtag. It looks like the condition ‘connectivity’ is not easy to foster. The fact that everybody involved is really busy in their own workplace context and “time flies” are probably the most hindering factors. These are my assumptions for the moment, we will take this up on the 15th May and I will reflect on this later on, in my project report.

Ben Tiggelaar with some of his thoughts on the psychology of change.

First, he stresses out the importance of both sides of the transformation coin:  “Think differently” and “Act differently”. In a transformation you want people to start thinking differently and to act differently. Every side of the coin has got three elements that matter.

Think differently

• What people believe is hard to change. It is not because you’ve come up with some change idea and strategy, that people take this up. Study what values and beliefs employees/people have, and start linking those with the direction of the change you have in mind.
• Efficacy: the belief in your ability to succeed in a particular situation. When people don’t believe that they are capable of doing what you ask in the change project, they will not change their behaviour when you’re not around. Perhaps they will act on the change when you in the neighbourhood, but they will download to the old routines when you’re not around.
• People imitate others. We are social beings and closely look at what others do. Statistics, numbers and strategies in PowerPoint are interesting but when people on the workfloor don’t “walk the talk”, others will not move towards the direction of the change. Make sure that enough people act on the change you want to see.

Act differently

• Make the abstract output goals of the change project concrete in “actions in-the-now”. What does the desired result in the future mean for actions now? Not easy, but the possible change in behaviour is increased with factor 10 or 11 when these abstract output goals are translated into concrete actions.
• Develop and apply  techniques for change in behaviour. One important technique concerns the (social) environment in which people work. Change the social and physical environment in which people work, and they will more likely change their behaviour and way of thinking. They will more likely change their behaviour than when you only try to let them think differently.
• Evaluate continuously. The third aspect is about giving feedback during the (learning) process of transformation. Don’t wait until “the end” to evaluate the change project, but be aware of the process of the transformation. A transformation is in essence a learning process. Don’t focus too much on the outcome of the learning process immediately (which is understandeable). Paradoxically, the fastest road to change is allowing detours on the learning road, with continuous, instant feedback and room for failure. 

References

Cherry, K. 2014. Self Efficacy (What It Is and Why It Matters). [online] Available at: http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/self_efficacy.htm  [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].

Tiggelaar, B. (2010, October 19). Dromen, Durven Doen. Spectrum.

Virgina Satir, a family therapist, developed a model for change (Satir et al, 1991) from her work with individuals and families.  She observed individuals and families that were confronted with a wide range of changes. From her observations she distinguished a number of phases when individuals are confronted with change.

The initial state is one of reasonable status quo. The normal state of our (human) mind is chaos. Contrary to what we would like to assume, our mind is in disorder (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Since this state of psychic entropy is far from pleasant, we keep searching for ways to re-establish a purposeful order in our minds. This results in the “status quo” Satir refers to. But the negentropy (state of order) is threatened when something new enters the system. This foreign element, as Satir calls it, causes a period of chaos.  During this moment of chaos, all kinds of feelings enter the world of the individual: anxiety, despair,  anger, all kinds of fight or flight reactions. But at some point, often when things have reached their worst, an insight or idea emerges and provides a direction of “the way out”.  Interesting remark: in Chinese, the word “crisis” consists of two symbols: one representing danger, and the other represents opportunity.

The period of chaos turns into an opportunity to learn, the foreign element that disturbed the order is accepted for what it is and is no longer perceived as dangerous. Interesting would be to look at that turning point in the perception of the individual.

When exactly did it turn over to the positive side?

That kind of waking up, seeing the change in a different, more optimistic light? Also important: in what conditions did this take place? Can we create the right conditions so that the “danger” becomes “opportunity”? Because, after this mental click, the individual can begin the journey of integration (Satir, 1991. Weinberg, 1997). So, the flipping of the mental coin is an essential turning point in the process of transformation. From then onwards, the foreign element can be integrated through practice, and the new status quo is born. Note that the new status quo is of higher performance level than the late status quo.

Imagine an experienced teacher who has got it all under control. At a certain point, the young, new headmaster comes up with a number of innovations. I’m sure you can think of an example, perhaps something to do with a flat mobile 10 inch device. The enthousiastic head “saw the light” in some workshop at a conference, and immediately takes action (phase 5 of Kotter’s 8 steps, remember this post). What is the effect of this foreign element on the mind of the experienced teacher? It threatens to dis-order his balance, his mental order. An order that was preciously, cautiously and probably very wisely constructed. Hopefully, the experienced teacher can quickly flip the mental coin and start to look at the innovation from the integration perspective. But better would be, imho, that the head was aware of the process at hand, and was able to create the right conditions (trust, curiosity, connectivity and tenacity) for the experienced teacher to limit the feelings of distress in the chaos phase.

First, the head needs to know this. This is a matter of knowledge. When you don’t know that it works this way, it is a very logic reaction to fly off, and force the innovation down people’s throats. Are heads of school departments trained in these matters? I don’t think so. Considering the importance of leadership in schools (please don’t confuse with authority) and the upcoming educationaI reforms in Flanders, I would place my bets at the professional development of headmasters, ás well as the professional development of the teachers. For the sake of our biggest treasures: the kids themselves.

References

Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2012). Making Sense of Change Management: A Complete Guide to the Models Tools and Techniques of Organizational Change. Kogan Page Publishers.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row, New York.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1993). Why we need things. History from things: Essays on material culture, 20-29.

Roels, J. (2012). Cruciale dialogen. Maklu.

Satir, V., Banmen, J., Gerber, J., & Gomori, M. (1991). The Satir model: Family therapy and beyond. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.

Weinberg, G. M. (1997). Quality Software Management: Anticipating Change (Vol. 4). Dorset House, New York.

Image Satir’s model: http://genshigenbutsu.blogspot.be/2007/11/satir-change-model.html

In my previous post I wrote about my reading plans at the start of  the IC2 module in my TELIC journey. IC2 stands for Innovation and Change 2. The previous module TEL2 focused on the relation learning <> technology in social contexts. This time we’re diving into the actual change process itself. Change-transformation and its underlying processes have intrigued me for years. What is at the root of human resistance for change? To me, it points towards this: change threatens  our inner, mental order. New information entering our consciousness either creates disorder (entropy) or frees up energy in our minds. I hope to learn more on this in IC2.

So, I’ve been reading Csikszentmihalyi on the anatomy of consciousness, following sessions with @janbommerez, and @johanroels and @charliepalmgren introduced me to the creative interchange process and the vicious circle. ‘Creative Interchange is the dynamic process that brings about transformation in human life.’ (Palmgren, 1998, p.126¹). Last year we’ve organised some sessions on creative interchange and the counterforce at work: the Vicious Cycle. Reminds me of writing about The Chicken Conspiracy for IC2! This book describes the origin of stress and organisational mediocrity. I will take it up in another blogpost.  

For  now, I finished reading John Kotter’s Leading Change. Very interesting, I made a summary in this popplet. John Kotter provides an 8 step plan for successful transformation in organisations.

Some thoughts on transformation in education:

1. Establishing a sense of urgency: are  teachers, headmasters (and pupils) truly determined to change? I don’t think so. I think too often there is a common sense of complacency with teachers. “It is not all that bad, a kind of sleepy contentment with the status quo”. True urgency is driven by the determination to win, not anxiety about losing.

2. Creating the guiding coalition: putting together a group with enough power to lead the change. On macro level, politicians perhaps have the power to lead the change, but I honestly have the impression they are driven by the power itself, and not the actual transformation in favour of our biggest treasures: the kids themselves. On school-level, there is actually no “guiding coalition”. At best there is a group of reformers lead by an innovative headmaster, but a lot of the teachers are  left out of the coalition, and they block progress. Schools have got ‘atypical’ organisational structures: one or more headmasters and many, many, many others: teachers, parents and children. This inequality in numbers makes creating a guiding coalition hard.

3. Developing a change vision: very often there is no shared vision. Perhaps there is a vision, indeed, but it is far from shared! Truly shared, I mean. Some staff meetings and brainstorm sessions don’t do the trick. Listen to the real culture-talk in the toilets after one of these staff meetings, and you’ll know what people really think.  A vision should provide real guidance, it should be a safe and easy reference for every innovative action in the school.

4. Communicating the vision, not once, ten times, but hundreds of times the vision needs to be communicated. Again, this is not the case for most schools. Undercommunication and inconsistency are ruling. Reason? We don’t have the time (we think we don’t), and we underestimate the importance of this phase. This a matter of knowledge. Headmasters are not trained in these matters. Also, actions speak louder than words. Do teachers and school leaders “walk the talk”?

Nothing undermines a communication program more quickly than inconsistent actions by leadership.

5. Empowering broad-based action: many people indeed work hard, very hard to improve and transform their organisation. I’m the first to say ‘thank you’ to those people. But since step 1 to 4 are neglected, the hard work is not efficient and transformation is blocked.
This fifth step is about removing as many barriers as possible and unleashing people to do their best work (Creative Interchange process). One example of a fundamental structural barrier: the tenured teacher with a fixed mindset. The system allows that teachers who don’t deliver quality can obtain full tenure. But there are many, many other structural and systemic barriers. A decent diagnosis of structures, systems, staff, style/leadership is needed before you can start removing barriers. Again, the leader is key, but headmasters are not trained to do so.  

6. Generating short-term wins: creating visible, unambiguous success. There are already many classroom innovations and good practices of educational transformation. Great! But the problem is they result from (groups of) passionate individuals. They are not embedded in the bigger whole that results from  steps 1 to 4. When those “passionata’s” stop teaching/working, often the innovation also ceases to exist.

7. Don’t let up: consolidating gains and producing more change. Be aware of the forces that re-inforce complacency and the status-quo. Even if you’re successful in the early stages, regression may still follow. Producing more change when the first steps are not fulfilled is futile.

8. Make it stick: sustained change. New practices must grow deep roots. Roots are often not deep enough. The result is people download to their old routines, and fundamental transformation is blocked. The social forces at work in cultures are strong, very strong. Book closed.

This is not the most optimistic blogpost but it was a good read! It helped me analyse what goes wrong with transformation in educational contexts.  Kotter’s 8 steps provide useful insights on transformation, but “how” are we going to realise this? Let’s start with our-selves: start interacting authentically. ‘Authentic interacting fosters creative interchange, in that we are willing to voice, with integrity, our unique perspective, thinking, interpretations, beliefs, and values while encouraging others to do the same.’ (Palmgren, 1998, p.127¹)

Walk the talk…

Summary in popplet: http://popplet.com/app/#/1699491

1. Hagan, S., & Palmgren, C. (1998). The Chicken Conspiracy: Breaking the Cycle of Personal Stress and Organizational Mediocrity. Recovery Communications.

A change agent is anyone who has the skill and power to stimulate, facilitate, and coordinate the change effort (Lunenburg, 2011). It can be an internal employee or it can be an external one. At the start of this new IC2 module, it is a good idea to look a bit closer at this role of change agent (consultant).

According to Lunenburg (2011) there are four types of change agents:

• Outside pressure type: from the outside of the organisation, this type often provides more radical change options.
• People-change-technology type: the focus of the change agent is the individual. If the individual changes its behaviour, the organisation will also change.
• Analysis-for-the-top type: focus on changing the organizational structure to improve output and efficiency. Many managers take up this role.
• Organization-development type: focus on internal processes such as interpersonal group relations and communication. Cultural change approach. Also taken up by many managers.

In my experience, changes in educational contexts (schools) are way too informal. In Flanders, a change agent is not "present" in schools. Most likely, it is a headmaster or an innovative teacher/ICT coordinator. There is no role of change agent explicitly assigned to people. This is probably one of the reasons why change in school culture is so difficult.

If there are (implicit) change agents in schools, they are type 2 and 4: the focus on change of the individual; and the focus on the interpersonal group relations. External change agents are not present in schools, and the improved efficiency output is perhaps too “business-like”. Although one could argue that improve teaching output and pedagogic efficiency are essential (business)outputs for a school…

Whatever type of change agent you are, you will have one, more or all of these characteristics:

Being able to build strong relationships based on trust

Authentic: lead by example

Empathic

Having a curious and open mind

Tenacious; realising that change is never easy, but the result of hard work. "The process is the leader" dixit @johanroels ...

References

1. Picture: http://chucksblog.emc.com/.a/6a00d83451be8f69e2017d3d2681e2970c-320wi 

Holland, Matt. "The change agent." (2000): 105-107.

Lunenburg, Fred C. "Managing change: The role of the change agent." International Journal of Management, Business and Administration 13.1 (2010). http://bit.ly/1jR9jLQ

5 Characteristics of a Change Agent | The Principal of Change." 2013. 5 Mar. 2014 http://georgecouros.ca/blog/archives/3615

The Process is the Leader - Johan Roels' presentation at http://www.slideshare.net/johanroels33

Some thoughts at the start of the new module: IC2. Innovation and Change 2.

In my TELIC adventure, a new chapter has started. Last Thursday, we started the new module IC2. IC2 stands for ‘Innovation and Change 2’. The main aim of the module is to ‘enable me to further develop my understanding of change management in relation to interpersonal and group aspects of change and to project management.’

I’m looking forward to my learning in relation with the tutors and the other participants. I’ve been giving this course a lot of thought the last few days. When working in the garden, when driving the car … when I’m disconnected. In a Dutch program some time ago, there was an interview with a professor Theo Compernolle. The conversation was about the illusion of multitasking. Our brain functions in linear processes, and we actually cannot multitask. ‘Disconnect to reflect’ are his words. Twitter followers, now you know the reason behind my reduced tweeting activities ...

At the startup of the new module, we received lot of information distributed through the wiki and in the first online Collaborate session. A lot of reading resources, summaries in PowerPoint presentations. This was a good start to construct my own learning path at the beginning of this module. Here’s what my disconnected mind came up with.

1. Reading, reading, reading

From all the reading resources I selected two to start with: the NMC horizon report 2014 because I believe that this will be very interesting for our ICT approach in my school. And secondly the book ‘Leading Change’ by John Kotter. I came across this video some time ago. It intrigued me but I never read the book. So, I decide to read this first. Honestly … it was also the very first book of the reading list that I could find in the library.

Next on my reading list are ‘Making Sense of Change Management’ by Cameron and Green (book is on the way), and ‘Schools That Learn’ by Peter Senge. Making Sense of Change Management is a classic, and it offers insights in a a lot of frameworks. This referential work is very promising and comprehensive, instead of focusing on one particular framework. Schools That Learn on the other hand focuses more on the contexts of educational transformation. It is a fieldbook for educators, parents and everyone who cares about education.  

2. Comparison of some project management tools and pick one.

Objects and technologies are equal partners in networks and systems. When well designed, a technology translates a major effort into a minor one (Latour, 2005). We received some tips on the use of project management software. I tested some:

http://www.ganttproject.biz/download > I’m not interested in another installable application, I prefer a cloud-based one.

In my school, we work with Google Apps as a social learning system. Ideally, we work on our projects inside this system. Of these four none convinced me. Arguments? Not in Dutch. Not free, not open-source. Setup in Google Apps dashboard did not work. Only one project or limited five users in the free version.

This German project seems promising. I set it up on my own domain name. Since my innovation project in the workplace mainly involves external partners, I will test this one out in my workplace innovation.

Pro: ease of use; Dutch; not too complicated; basic features such as milestones, tasks, file sharing, time-tracking; agenda seem sufficient enough.

In the future, I will further investigate the necessary features and the design of good project management tools and setup something of my own in the current Google Apps environment. Probably some combination of shared Google Sites templates with Spreadsheet functionalities. Keep you posted.

In the meanwhile, we also have to prepare a small presentation on how we would realise the vision of this  XP Doncaster innovative school. Working on this with Claire … Will share our presentation later.

My final writing assignment in the TEL2 module is submitted.

You find it here. It is about how Google Apps for Edu can be used as a Technology Enhanced Learning Environment (TELE).

I started on my outline for the final writing assignment.

Popplet is a great tool imho.

Here is a link to my outline.

During our last session we discussed and read the paper about ‘Distributed Cognition’. Distributed cognition is a psychological theory that says that knowledge lies not only within the individual but also in the individual’s social ¹ and physical environment. In this post I reflect on the paper.

Apart from the reflective blogpost, I will use the paper more  in my final writing assignment on Google Apps for Edu and how it affects the learning process in my school. It is really an interesting paper, and (in my opinion) since it was published  in 2000 a lot of the main ideas reoccur in other theories or pedagogical views  (collective intelligence – situated cognition -  artificial intelligence – connectivism).

At the end of the Collaborate session we were also asked to reflect and brainstorm about how we worked together, how it was for us to work in little groups. I remember that we all mentioned rather ‘technical’ elements of working together or feelings: the software we used (GoogleDocs, sharing Prezi), the language barrier, ‘very enjoyable’, ‘great adding on each others thoughts’, shared engagement, etc. Richard pointed out to us that we should think more about the underlying processes rather than on surface activities and results (cf. Vygotsky ²). What were the forces at work in our groups? Taking into account Vygotksy’s framework ³  and the crucial dialogue model of Johan Roels ⁴, I end up with following processes underlying our group work:

Interaction: we exchanged ideas in this Google Doc. This had a two way effect on our group members.

Dialogue: through an extra Collaborate session we shared thoughts, found value in each others points of view (appreciative understanding of opinions).

Communication: regularly e-mails were sent to make appointments and announcements.

Imagination: the sharing of the Prezi and the way Dave, Koen and Kieran used this tool fueled my own imagination.

Transformation: my final blogpost was a sum of the shared thoughts and experiences.

Remark about the  mediative role of the tools: it is very interesting to see how we used Google Docs, Blackboard Collaborate and Prezi to mediate these processes. We should indeed be more aware of how we mediate (delegate) these processes to the technologies. We focus too often on the tech tools and artefacts while the underlying processes are easily taken for granted.

1. The term social refers to a characteristic of living organisms as applied to populations of humans and other animals. It always refers to the interaction of organisms with other organisms and to their collective co-existence, irrespective of whether they are aware of it or not, and irrespective of whether the interaction is voluntary or involuntary.

3. ‘Vygotsky (1962/1986) held that learning is embedded within social events, and learning occurs as a learner interacts with people, objects and events in the environment. Through interaction with surroundings and communication with others, internalization and learning occurs.’

Voogt, J & Knezek G.  (eds 2008) International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education, Springer, p.253

4. Roels J. (2012) Cruciale Dialogen. Antwerpen, Garant. p. 29

In my two schools PCVO Het Perspectief and College OLV Ten Doorn I encountered a number of Technology Enabled/Enhanced Learning Environments – (TELEs).

I experienced all of them as a teacher and some of the TELEs I helped implementing (Google Apps).

Here is an overview of the TELEs used:

• Dokeos.com
• Chamilo.org
• Smartschool.be
• Google Apps for Education

In previous post for Wiki Task 2 I ended up with the following scheme.

Critical reading number 4 is this paper ‘Distributed cognition: Toward a New Foundation for Human-Computer Interaction Research’ ¹

The main idea in the paper is the following: cognition happens inside and outside humans, the theory says that ‘cognitive activity is constructed both from internal and external resources, and that the meaning of our actions is grounded in the context of the activity.’ ²   This in contrast to more traditional cognitive theories that focus more on the mental activity with the individual. Distributed cognition encompasses interactions between people ánd with resources and materials in the environment. When technology is well designed, the technology becomes integrated into the way people think, see and control activities.

The authors also want to provide an integrated approach/framework for research that combines ethnographic observation and controlled experimentation as a basis for design of digital work. When designing digital materials you should take into account this idea of distributed cognition. If not, you simply re-design the old model.

Let me try and make the main idea and the framework for design clear to you with two examples.

But first, important to understand the meaning of the words … What is ‘cognition’ actually?

Cognition is the mental process of ‘knowing’, including awareness, perception, reasoning or judgment. As Charlie Palmgren says it: ‘Cognition is the mental process used when modifying,  inventing, constructing and transforming our mental models. It uses existing knowledge and new information generated through awareness and appreciation.’³

Mobile technology and feedback

‘Just as a blind’s person’s cane or a cell biologist’s microscope is a central part of the way they perceive the world, so well-designed work materials become integrated into the way people think, see, and control activities, part of the distributed system of cognitive control.' ⁴

So, likewise (although the comparison with the blind man is a bit off track), my smartphone and tablet are fundamental devices that are integrated in the way I think and work. For example giving feedback to students’ work on GooglePlus is much more easier, effective and instant than when using a PC when I log in in the evening. Or how sharing some thoughts on Twitter, helping some tweeps or picking up some new information on Twitter, is essential for how I perceive my job as an educator. The meaning of my actions is shaped by the mobile techology.

Design digital material

We too often see information and cognitive activity as lineair. From point A, over point B to point C. This is not how we cognition works. For example the way we use the browser: scrolling back and forth between pages to find information. Pad++ is an experimental software system to support exploration of dynamic multiscale interfaces. It provides zooming and panning with structured information to create a dynamic way of browsing. The software allows you to exploit computational mechanisms effectively.  In tasks requiring returns to prior pages, users of PadPrints (based on Pad++) completed tasks in 61.2% of the time required by users of the same browser without PadPrints. ⁵

You’ve worked on a number of assignments, you have been developing some kind of (digital) product … And after some days, or after having seen twelve interesting tweets on the subject, you start doubting your work of a few days before? Not that is is per se bad or entirely wrong, but there is so many information out there. Consequence of the information overload, I guess.

Anyway, in this post I wrote about some criteria for evaluating a technology learning environment. I found it important to build upon the definition of p21.org. My line of thought was that a good definition should automatically point towards the criteria.

Then I came across this (pragmatic and elaborate) list of criteria for online courses. It was actually sitting in my Diigo library for some time. Waiting for the right time to pop up. Couldn’t it have popped up a week or two earlier? :-)

http://elearning.typepad.com/thelearnedman/ID/evaluatingcourses.pdf

In Wiki Task 1 - here and here - we looked at what Technology Enabled (Enhanced) Learning Environments (TELEs) are. The next step is to look at criteria for evaluating if and when a technology is a good TELE. Criteria are one of the most fundamental elements of making a high quality decision. Simply put, criteria are the way that you define success for a specific decision.¹

Considering my definition in previous post, “Technology Learning environments are digital structures, tools, and communities where students and educators find inspiration and draw upon resources to make sense out of things, where they connect and construct meaningful solutions to problems in the 21st century.”  the criteria by which TELEs can be evaluated, are/should be included in this definition.

1. TELEs feed inspiration;
2. TELEs provide resources (easily);
3. TELEs enhance  ‘meaning making’ on those resources;
4. TELEs make it easy  to connect to others (humans and nonhumans);
5. TELEs enable problem-solving for relevant 21st Century problems.

   Read more »

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/624847 2013-11-30T12:34:53Z 2013-12-10T21:31:52Z

   Our last telic session was very interesting and clarifying. Not only did we have two great presentations on this Bruno Latour paper, we also had to brainstorm in little groups on different items. One discussion was about this image, and how it relates to the Latour paper.
   

   

   Interesting to me was how Danny en co. looked at this picture from the ‘delegating’ point of view. What do humans delegate to the nonhumans in this picture.We delegate force to the cranes. Without the cranes, putting together the iron framework would be very hard or even impossible. This delegating to nonhumans was an important idea in the Latour paper. An idea that I didn’t take up in my previous reflection on the Latour paper.

   What is this ‘delegating’ all about?

   Read more »

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/623538 2013-11-26T09:59:33Z 2016-01-24T16:02:00Z

   

   Strange reading assignment for #telic1 this time. The paper is called ‘Mixing Humans and Nonhumans Together: The Sociology of a Door-Closer’. The author is Jim Johnson but that actually is a pseudonym for Bruno Latour. Latour is a French sociologist of science and anthropologist, and is best known for withdrawing from the subjective/objective division¹. The reason for this pseudonym was his opinion that no American sociologist is willing to read things that are not American.
   

   To illustrate the sometimes rather strange language constructions (to me), I cite a paragraph from the paper:

   ‘For the umpteenth time I have screamed to Robin, “don’t sit on the middle of the rear seat: if I brake too hard, you’re dead.” In an auto shop further along the freeway I come across a device made for tired-and-angry-parents-driving-cars-with-kids-between-two-and-five (that is too old for a baby seat and not old enough for a seat belt) and-from-small-families (that is without other persons to hold them safely) and-having-cars-with-two-separated-front-seats-and-headrests.’

   This sentence illustrates the metaphoric style of the author. He uses the example of a new type of child car seat to illustrate how we constantly invent technologies to cope with growing complexities in our society. Complexities, by the way, that we create ourselves and are not necessarily of major importance. Do we use/invent technologies because of the lack of discipline of humans? If we would all have the discipline of driving carefully, we would not need car seats, we would not need to brake too hard? This idea of being undisciplined and therefore in need of new technologies is very present in the paper. People need to be disciplined to close the door behind them. But since people are unreliable, we might find a better solution in disciplining one person or a technology to close the door after all the others.²

   The example of the car seat also illustrates the main purpose of the author: drawing our attention to the work of Nonhumans (technologies) in social situations and that there is actually no division between the technology and us operating the technology (Bruno Latour is best known for withdrawing from the subjective/objective division).

   Some other blogposts were very useful in unpuzzling this metaphor of the door-closer, and the purpose of it in our road to master technology enhanced learning environments. I share them here:

   • http://cburdetthumancomm.blogspot.be/2012/05/jim-johnson-mixing-humans-and-nonhumans.html
   • http://asociologist.com/2013/08/30/the-sociology-of-the-door-closer-redux/

   Read this article as a summary of the paper:

   • http://readingdept.wordpress.com/2013/10/31/bruno-latour-delegating-to-jim-johnson/

   So, what are my conclusions after having mixed this paper with my instincts, with other readings, and with the content of our current Technology Enhanced Learning module?

   Three ideas:

   When using technologies in teaching environments, the teacher is very much related to the technology. There is no division between the technology and the teacher. We must be aware of how we ‘delegate’³ fundamental elements of good teaching to technologies. When we are undisciplined in certain areas, we cannot rely on the technology to solve our own lack of discipline. Take ‘effective communication’ for instance. Effective communication starts or ends with competences of the teacher. In our school we use GooglePlus as ad-valvas for our students. It is not due to the technology that we communicate ineffectively, but sometimes the technology is seen an easy scapegoat?

   Teachers facilitate as hinges for effective learning. A hinge is a very small but effective technology that allows a door to be easily opened and closed. It seems a very minor invention, but it has a great impact on the use of the door. The hinges are important to bridge ‘in’ and ‘outside’ the house. The teacher and how he uses technology seems to be very small in the complex environment of educational systems and structures, but this has major impact on the effect of learning.

   The technology is invented, designed by people who assign different scenarios and roles to the technology. We must be aware of these scenarios in-scribed to the technology by those who create them. Most likely other people (teachers) will come up with different scenarios and roles of their own.⁴ Which can be great. People like manipulating powerful technologies⁵. An example in my school: we have a culture of professional development of teachers in small design teams. This happens quite organically, which is a problem when an external ‘inspector’ is asking us how we encourage professional development. The balance of actually doing (professional development) and putting it in paper (words, words, words) is a constant tension in education. We now use http://pearltrees.com to visualise our initiatives in teams that lead to professional development. We assigned a different role to pearltrees from our own needs. We needed a very user-friendly, quick way of curating professional development activities that emphasize the relations between people and roles. We use six roles (Lunenberg, Dengerink, Korthagen, 2013) as a basis for the professional development in the pearltrees. I’m quite sure that the people who invented this great tool pearltrees did not have teacher professional development tool in mind.

   The pearltree (in Dutch): http://pear.ly/crtpn

   Conclusion:

   Knowledge, morality … are not properties of humans but of humans accompanied by their retinue (effect) of delegated characters. Since each of those delegates ties together part of our social world, it means that studying social relations without nonhumans is impossible (Latour, 1988a). There is no division between the teacher and the technology he uses.

   
   

   1. Bruno Latour on Wikipedia

   2. http://readingdept.wordpress.com/2013/10/31/bruno-latour-delegating-to-jim-johnson/

   3. to delegate: from de- "from, away" (see de-) + legare "send with a commission" http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=delegate

   4. Madeleine Akrich http://brettworks.com/2011/12/01/on-wonderment-and-scripts-in-electronic-music-making/

   5. Empowered learners – Manipulation Gee paper http://telic.posthaven.com/gee-learning-by-design

    

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/621135 2013-11-19T11:30:31Z 2013-12-08T14:14:47Z

   

   My first post for Wiki task 1 was very fruitful. The process of getting into it was meaningful. But I am not entirely satisfied with the answer on ‘What are technology learning environments?’. It was good to write about the different terms that are in use, and the different perspectives of how people talk about learning environments. So, it brought clarity. I even added something about TELE. Koen pointed me out that this wasn’t so clear.

   @zelfstudie technology enabled or enhanced learning environments. Though is also bit general term ... Should I add that in the blogpost?

   — Bram Bruggeman (@brambruggeman) 11 november 2013

   I investigated some further and found this interesting paper. I fully agree that an increased interest in the notion of learning environments has emerged. It explores some of the ways in which technology-based learning environments may act potentially as trojan horses and, as such, drastically alter the educational landscape. ¹
   

   Read more »

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/621128 2013-11-19T10:11:25Z 2013-11-19T18:16:16Z

   Reflection after session 3.

   At the end of each #telic1 session we are asked to give a keyword that expresses our feeling. Last Thursday I said ‘hungry’. Not only because I really was hungry :-), but mainly because the word expressed my feeling of wanting answers to the difficult Lave paper. This paper contains a lot, and we all read the paper, reflected on it, created digital artefacts and presented them.

   But what do Richard and Guy think of this? What is the essence of this paper we should take with us? Should we try to grasp everything in this paper? Are we on track? Etc.
   Feeling in need for feedback…  A feeling I’m expressing in this post, but will also mention that to R & G  in person.

   It is a fundamental fact of human nature that we are inquisitive. We want answers! ¹

   Why is that?

   Because having answers creates order in our conscious minds. The scientific quest is to discover the order in the external world of space, time, energy and matter. The spiritual quest is to discover order in our consciousness.²

   On feedback.

   Feedback is one of the most powerful influences on learning and achievement, but this impact can be either positive or negative. (Hattie, 2007)³ It is essential how I  look towards this experience. I can either push this towards an opportunity to learn, or I can point towards R & G for not giving me feedback.

   Not ‘what’ overcomes us, but ‘how’ we look at it makes us feel as we feel.

   

   Secondly, the type of feedback is less important. Nearly any type of feedback can be valuable, only if there is a logical link with the challenge in which my mental energy is invested.⁴

   Two types of feedback brought me back to the optimal experience of flow in the telic Msc programme:

   1. I looked differently at the reading assignments. It is not per se about “all” the contents in the papers, but they contain links with the summative assignment of writing a paper: 'Learning always takes place in social contexts but is inevitably an individual achievement'.

   2. My fellow-in-critical-reading-three Claire was smart enough to ask for feedback. After having contacted her (thanks Claire) she told me it was better to focus on one aspect in a paper than trying to tackle the whole thing. And relying on our common sense and instincts is more important.

   I’m looking forward to reading the next paper this week.

   It’s a puzzle, Richard said. Well, let’s start with the corner pieces: instinct and common sense, learning, social, individual achievement.  

   

   1. http://snap.lbl.gov/science/why.php

   2. http://www.pkrishna.org/Science-Spirituality.html

   3. http://growthmindseteaz.org/files/Power_of_Feedback_JHattie.pdf

   4. (freely translated from) Csikszentmihalyi, Optimal Experience of Flow, 1999, p.85

   
   
   
   
   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/617801 2013-11-09T22:00:50Z 2013-12-08T14:14:25Z

   Wiki formative task 1 is:

   What are technology learning environments?  Create hyperlinked pages that outline the types, characteristics, terminology, application and uses of TEL environments.

   This seemed easy at first and I started gathering resources from my network enthousiastically. I googled, collected, curated. After selection, it boiled down to the following diigo list.

   https://www.diigo.com/list/brambruggeman/TEL2/2qk3yrbr4

   But when I was trying to put this together in a blog post, I got more and more confused.

   

   I struggled to putting this in a coherent blogpost. At first I thought it was simply not clear to me, but then I realised that a lot of these articles, notions, terms are being used with different and mixed interpretations and perceptions. On top of that it is not always clear if people mean ‘learning’ or ‘pedagogy’ or ‘instruction’ or even ‘education’. So, a clear notion about the use of terms is important before going any further. Take blended learning for example. Blended learning is the integrated combination of traditional learning with web-based online approaches. (Whitelock & Jelfs, 2003)

   Read more »

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/617292 2013-11-08T16:32:30Z 2013-11-08T16:37:25Z

   When reading the paper I was wondering about the concept "learning" some more, and about some of the learning theories she is criticizing. If they indeed see learning as a merely individual mental process.

   Some definitions of learning
   

   * Definition of learning on Wikipedia: “Learning is acquiring new, or modifying and reinforcing existing knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, or preferences”. I agree with Lave that this impoverishes and misrecognizes the importance of relatedness in the learning process…
   “Learning is not compulsory; it is contextual. It does not happen all at once, but builds upon and is shaped by what we already know. To that end, learning may be viewed as a process, rather than a collection of factual and procedural knowledge. Learning produces changes in the organism and the changes produced are relatively permanent.” (1)

   Conclusion: the relatedness and social character is not really present. Perhaps one could think of “contextual” as “in relation to the other” but that is my interpretation.

   * In a previous blogpost I wrote about Twitter as a learning environment. In that post, I also thought about the process of learning, and I came across another article (also pretty difficult) that gives following definition of learning:

   “Learning can be defined as ‘changes in the behavior of an organism that result from regularities in the environment of the organism.” (2)

   Conclusion: this explicitly mentions the relation to the environment.

   Which seems correct to me.

   * Burns (1995, p99) "conceives of learning as a relatively permanent change  in behaviour with behaviour including both observable activity and internal processes such as thinking, attitudes and emotions." (3)

   Conclusion: interesting definition of learning with both activities and internal processes, but no mentioning of the relation. So, indeed individual process according to him.

   Learning theories

   An overview: http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsld/resources/theories.html

   * Sensory Stimulation Theory > no mentioning of social, collective character

   * Reinforcement Theory (Skinner)  > no mentioning of social, collective character

   * Cognitive gestallt approaches (importance of experience) > no mentioning of social, collective character

   * Holistic Learning > no mentioning of social, collective character

   * Humanist approach (Rogers) > mentions the relation teacher-learner. But this relationship is more seen as one of creating the right conditions for the learner. So no meaningful, reciprocal relations.

   * Experiental learning (Kolb) > no mentioning of social, collective character.

   * Adult learning > no mentioning of social, collective character

   * Social Constructivism (Vygotsky) http://viking.coe.uh.edu/~ichen/ebook/et-it/social.htm

   > more emphasis on the social context and on culture. Explicit mentioning of the “others” involved, but still a relation that is not entirely on equal level.

   Lave p. 150 “... learning is an aspect of changing participation in changing “communities of practice” everywhere. Wherever people engage for substantial periods of time, day by day, in doing things in which their ongoing activities are interdependent, learning is part of their changing participation in changing practices.”

   p. 153 “...it is not difficult to imagine them (i.e. the law masters) as changing learners themselves … both are participants in a larger, varied constellation of participants.”

   --> This goes further than Vygotsky.

   Conclusion:
   

   Considering some general definitions and most of the learning theories, Lave is correct in her dualistic view on learning theories. They do underestimate the reciprocal, meaningful and equal relations.

   

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/617285 2013-11-08T16:09:26Z 2013-11-08T16:10:13Z

   

   Download the paper here.
   

   The main purpose of the paper (to me) is challenging a number of theories that see learning as merely an ‘individual’ mental process. These theories marginalize people for being ‘not so good at learning’. Secondly, these dualistic theories create divisions: successful in learning <-> not successful, normal <-> subnormal, good results <-> bad results, ideal <-> not ideal.

   Therefore she (and Wenger) reconsider learning as a social and collective phenomenon.  Her understanding of learning as a social practice is developed on two major researches: one on tailor’s apprenticeships in Liberia, and one on learning in 19th-century mosque schools in Egypt.

   

   Lave doesn’t suggest that the entire system should turn towards an education of apprenticeship, but it is valuable to look deeper into learning as a social practice so that education can benefit from these new insights on learning in practice.

   Both perspectives on learning have effect on teaching in schools. “Learning, taken to be first and principally the identity-making life projects of participants in communities of practice, has a crucial implication for the teaching in schools.”

   Mere classroom instruction versus a process of facilitating the circulation of school knowledgeable skill into the changing identities of students. In this second viewpoint, teachers should be intensely involved in communities of practice in which their identities are changing as well. Teachers should be ‘premium’ learners themselves. It made me think of this video:
   
   

   Great Teachers Are Great Learners - AITSL from Innovation Unit on Vimeo.

   Juliun and I are putting together our thoughts in this Google Doc.

   We will again collaborate on a Prezi as a digital artefact.
   

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/613786 2013-10-28T17:21:51Z 2013-10-28T17:55:23Z

   In the #telic1 program we get all kinds of supporting materials. We received extra information on reading critically and academic reading in general.

   I've made a simple diagram in an attempt to summarize:

   

   Share any good articles on academic reading and writing you have ... Use comments section here, or use the #telic1 hashtag on twitter.
   

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/613763 2013-10-28T16:52:04Z 2013-10-28T16:52:05Z

   In preparation  for session 2 on October 24th, we were asked to work in pairs. Each pair had to read and discuss a paper (more on the Gee paper in my previous post) and then present a digital artefact with the outcome of our ‘blended’ ideas. First, Juliun and I worked in a shared Google Doc. Adding our thoughts and posing some questions, remarks to what we both had added in the doc. Then we created a Prezi, that we also discussed in the online Collaborate session. Thanks to Juliun this online presenting with Prezi worked out great. Actually, I found it a better way of presenting to the others, instead of sharing our screen through the Collaborate environment. We provided the link in the chat room, and people followed the Prezi while we were talking through the Collaborate.

   The Prezi:

   What I particularly liked about the way Juliun and I were working together was the authentic interaction and creative integrating of ideas. The process was a good example of how people can blend thoughts, how we inspired each other  to go further, to challenge each other. I felt openness between us, and we were able to express thoughts about the paper and I could add some links to my own experience.  As a result, creatively integrating ideas between the two of us uplifted the quality of the outcome.

   #satisfaction would be the hashtag if I had to tweet about it …

   Secondly, I not only learnt about the content of the paper, I learnt from the interaction with Juliun as well.  How he outlined the three purposes in the Gee paper made me value the importance of pinpointing the purpose while reading. Seeking the purpose behind the words. Thanks Juliun.
   

   

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman tag:telic.posthaven.com,2013:Post/610789 2013-10-20T14:51:23Z 2013-10-20T14:52:11Z

   In session one we read a short story of Asimov, The Fun They Had. The story is about how education is shaped in the future..
   

   You can read the entire story here: http://users.aber.ac.uk/dgc/funtheyhad.html

   Two thoughts I want to share here. First, the future of teaching as Asimov describes it is quite depressing. I really, really hope this does not become a reality. It would be aweful if the relationships between students and teachers would disappear.

   Secondly, what did not change in the future of Asimov is that children still have their natural curiosity. Phew, kids are still naturally curious. Margie still wonders, wants to know more! Reassuring :-).

   

   Does your classroom inspire and cultivate curiosity in children?

   Check out this Youtube video about Curiosity (quite an uptempo speaker, that Hank, by the way).

   ]]> Bram Bruggeman