This presentation at AECT was a lively discussion about the way that systemic thinking can influence that way that we create positive change. Regina Sayles Koilparampil, a former GA – now Alumna, was a great help to explain the roles of trust and how she was able to build the build trust between the university and the school. After this presentation, some in the audience asked that I write about the experience and thinking so that others can better identify leverage points, stakeholder involvement and pressures from supra-systems, peer systems and feedback. I will after the holidays!
I learn so much from one of my favorite teachers — nature. I walk down the slope to the local stream. I find a stable rock so to stand in middle of the rushing water. With eyes gently opened, I gaze at the water rushing, reminding me of life. Like water, life keeps moving, and there is not a second of a stillness. If there is less motion, it is really because the water gets stuck behind a rock. But, the water doesn’t stop; it revolves in a quick circle, finds an opening and quickly exits to continue finding its way down stream — where it is meant to go. Rocks do not detain water for long. In fact the rocks are shaped and smoothed by the water as it continues to move.
May my activity be like water in a stream. When reaching the rocky obstacles of time, money, and other ideas, may I gently roll over the rocks so that the rocks may be shaped due to my fluid and positive influence. While I move mentally, may beauty be created in the environment so that others moving through either desire to be part of the stream or may enjoy the milieu. May the stream of my life continue to lead me to where I am meant to go with beauty, persistence and part of the whole.
There is an observation, that most don’t like to discuss. But, after many years, I think that experience bares me out. The dissertation question is iterative. The question written,re-written and then, with input from a dissertation committee is often substantially re-written again. The question could be refined for many reasons. Maybe the way that author wrote the question, is not the way that others understood the question. Sometimes the question is written, but the observation instrument looks at something else, and the person says, “Oh… I really want to know this…” Sometimes, the question is even being determined while the instrument is being made a data collect. Ones looks at the data, and may say ahhh… “so, my data actually answers this question!” Why do I bother writing this, as it seems to be known? We should not admonish this evolution of thought!
I have worked with colleagues, whom I deeply respect, that seem to simplify the process. Professors sometimes get frustrated with students who do not have the question, just the way that the professor defines it. The oversimplification causes the student great frustration who self admonishes that he/she did not get it “right” the first time. It seems that some believe that the process is 100% linear. It would be clean if our brains worked that way, but they do not.
Our brains are a huge map or more like a web. We get inspired and make sense of information while we are in the shower, walking the dog, dreaming, making dinner… the list goes on. That applies to question writing as well. However, there is the expectation that the question is at the beginning, coming from the ideas of the scientific process. In the “scientific process” a linear process has been identified for experimentation: question, hypothesis, data collection, findings, conclusion with inferences and questions. Here is an awesome article from 1922 attributing our linear expectations and our desire for over simplification to the behaviorist: THE FALLACY OF EXCLUSIVE SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY which is not the way our brains work.
Whether we cast blame on the behaviorist or someone else, let’s admit that our brains are messy and make sense of information in linear and non-linear ways. The words we chose to write may or may not communicate what we want them to say. We communicate thoughts in a linear way only for others to understand us, where in our minds the thought or question can make perfect sense. We humans take a while to define what we mean which keeps us talking to one another, refining our thought and questions. That is the positive side; the disagreements keep us collaborating to discuss our questions.
It is not happy people who are grateful but grateful people that are happy. ~ unknown
A new semester is upon me. I feel the anticipation in the air. This morning, I awoke at 4AM wondering if I can get it all done.
I cleaned the kitchen, put out the recycling and thought about the articles that have not been submitted to publishers.
I washed the dishes and made my tea, and thought the of the syllabi that need to be on D2L.
I found that we were low on the breakfast protein drink and thought about what the students really need to be successful in their careers.
I went to Amazon to check on our subscription order and then thought of the skills and really learning that I want to take place.
I made my green tea and cleaned the tea pot, and thought of the organization that needs to be done to make finding things easier.
I put together my lunch and Jaz’s lunch and thought of other professors’ questions and wondered if I answered them.
I gathered the recycling and think about how long it has been since I wrote in my blog.
Then, I loathe myself for thinking so much.
I breathe. I pray. I meditate. I think.
I am thankful for the the students that are coming.
I am grateful that the universe has trusted me to be their teacher.
I feel the expanse of our technology growing in so many ways to reach all learners.
I know that we are all fortunate to have an education.
I want to reach the hearts and minds of myself and my students.
I seek clarity and wisdom to make choices with my time without resentment, but instead with gratefulness.
I am thankful for the awesome privilege to think about such things.
Good morning it is now 6AM.
This is a brilliant animated infographic on why our brain craves our infographics based on decent research.
This past Thursday’s class, I was feeling so very sick (Today, I am definitely getting better but home, irrigating my nose ever few hours, in hopes of continuing the upward trend.). So, Thursday’s class – Instructional Technology students needed to complete work with very little verbal instruction. I was worried about this since I had asked the students to take the S curve – Adoption Decision Theory (Rogers, 1995) and Gleicher’s Formula to create a story! To my surprise the students were brilliant! Below are three groups of students who completed their stories.
I was impressed by more than students completing their task with little verbal instruction. The graduate students quickly took the theory and applied it into a story, without seeing lots of examples or parsing the theories/ideas into a concrete questions about each.
I wonder if the structure helped the students do that? Here is part of the structure used:
- On each Google Presentation side, I wrote a prompt for that slide.
- Then, in the notes, there was a “step” or concept to address in that slide.
- Students were pre-assigned groups – on the first page of the presentations.
- We has an 1 hour synchronous time when we reviewed the assignment (but 2 groups had it completed before the review!)
The class is multi-delivery so that the students are used to figuring out some directions on their own. It will be interesting to hear from students their perception of what helped them to complete the task. Regardless: AWESOME class! And, I hope that students got some ideas of how they could use group story telling with on-line tools!
So yesterday I gave the LMS/CMS assignment. Though the rubric and directions specified each step and how it would be assessed, there was lots of confusion and student anxiety was running high. Luckily the students told me it was high! So, we had decided to have a good draft of the assignment due next Thursday, and the final draft will be due days after that. This way they can get feedback from each other.
It seems, this is a strong advantage for the professor – the onground and online. I was able to probe the onground students who really helped me to think about the students needs, which are very hard to interpret when the students are at a distance.
On both classes (with the multi-delivery system) the students onground were able to give advice to me about about ways that would make easier for them. The one class gave me inputs to the hyperlinks that would help them to complete the assignment. The other class reinforced the needs of the community. It seems that the onground groups is tending to the be “voice” for the other.
Ok, maybe it is the snow or maybe it just having so many things online and people get sick of reading. But there are two very bright women who were unable to complete assignments because they did not upload the work into a dropbox, but did the difficult part of the assignment. What was interesting – it was two students who had had me before. It seems like no matter what you do – have checklists, learning paths, list of directions, submits on pages, links to the submission, someone will loose for forget something. It is very interesting!