This introductory guide to design thinking for educators lays the foundations for better problem solving and creative ideas.
To dig deeper into reciprocity, I recommend Adam Grant’s book Give and Take.
Giving, taking, and matching are three fundamental styles of social interaction, but the lines between them aren’t hard and fast. You might find that you shift from one reciprocity style to another as you travel across different work roles and relationships. It wouldn’t be surprising if you act like a taker when negotiating your salary, a giver when mentoring someone with less experience than you, and a matcher when sharing expertise with a colleague. But evidence shows that at work, the vast majority of people develop a primary reciprocity style, which captures how they approach most of the people most of the time. And this primary style can play as much of a role in our success as hard work, talent, and luck.
~ Adam Grant
I have always been puzzled by the way learning is referred to as something that can be ‘owned’. It is not a possession.
I understand responsibility, but saying, “students owning their learning” seems an odd turn of phrase. Like we are returning a possession.
What do you think?
— Tom Barrett (@tombarrett) November 17, 2020
This left me thinking about ownership and instead wondering about assemblages and systems.
A desiring machine is an assemblage “always in relation to the big social machines and technological machines” (Deleuze, 2004, p. 243). Language, media, literature, education and capitalism for example always orient a body towards a particular way of expressing desire, to produce a desiring subject so to speak. Desire always precedes subjectivity; subjectivity is the codification of ‘acceptable’ and ‘unacceptable’ desires within a given body.
Learning, for Deleuze, is an experience which cannot be planned or organised, but that all learning is an event that shocks, causing some form of transformation within the body and mind of the learner.
Today the throughline is wellbeing
This exploratory course in the SOLO Taxonomy will better equip you to find, classify and act upon signals of learning growth.
Inspired by an optics metaphor used in ethnography, this mental model explores our perception and understanding of behaviour. Use it as part of your team’s developmental dialogue and process.
How might we fully appreciate the resources needed to introduce these new ideas and what they overlap with? How can we create space for people to make the most of this idea and for it to have the impact we want? Which programmes or existing innovations might be discarded to release energy and resources?
When new programmes are introduced, that draw down on the finite energy and effort from those involved without stopping other parallel ideas and releasing resource reserves, we get innovation compression, and a potential weakening of the original ideas.
Therefore, when leading, we should be mindful about what we are clearing away just as much as what we are adding.
We need to lead with a deep appreciation for what is on people’s plates. We need to avoid innovation compression by clearing the way, closing existing programmes and providing people the resources they need to make things work.
It is interesting to consider this alongside Alex Quigley’s post about change in isolation.
Reality is not Mediocristan, so we should learn to live with it.
My thoughts have been around restarting. I think that I inherit this from Will Richardson and his mantra to do things ‘ ‘. However, even when I think about Richardson’s work, much of it is about reframing education around learning. However, the more I think about it, such approaches as seem to be as much about recasting the materials that we already have in a new light.
I think that this will be one of those provocations that I will come back to regularly as it helps in making sense of the change at hand.
On Tuesday I co-facilitated a design thinking education event with Google in Melbourne. We worked alongside 50 teachers from Catholic schools.
It got me wondering about what it takes to get the most from a design thinking (DT) process. Although my lense is for teachers and education teams, these ideas apply to anyone using the DT process.
For each idea, I have shared some links for further articles and readings to allow you to dig deeper.
Welcome to a new decade and to the first edition of the Dialogic Learning Weekly newsletter for 2020. I want to set aside some of the normal topics I share to address the bushfires here in Australia.I know many of you don’t live here in Australia but would have seen a range of media coverage over the last few months. It is important that platforms like this newsletter help share accurate information that help you understand the reality of what is happening.It has been raining here in Melbourne ov
This is an example of a SOLO Taxonomy Question Chain. A series of connected question that explores a subconcept.
Follow each row across and you will see each question using the language and verbs associated with the SOLO Taxonomy levels.
When we sit in a circle we offer a powerful symbol that we are united and equal participants. Where it is practical, I try and start my workshops this way. I did this yesterday with teachers in a school in Sydney. After committing to some protocols, a few provocations encouraged a dialogue about teaching and learning.
In this issue I share what I am learning as I attempt to deepen, extend and abstract my experiences of dialogue. Recently I have been learning some of the indigenous origins of dialogue and how it is used within different cultures. I hope you enjoy the ideas and they get you talking.
Welcome. This week a set of provocations about EMPATHY.
I was really taken by your comment on the need for more subjective sharing from the fields, rather than relying on PhDs. I find this interesting and think that education as a whole would benefit from more sharing. However, it feels like the reality has moved away from this.
Moving into a world of Pinterest classrooms, it would seem that less educators are willing to share their experiences and experiments.
In addition to this, some would question who benefits from such sharing? I agree that that even the worst bloggers are making use smarter and that the smartest person in the room is the room. The problem is that this may not be the prevailing ethos in schools. The issue is that this requires a systemic collaborative culture, which I do not think is present. People are instead packaging up what they think is there ‘intellectual property’ and placing it on sites like Teachers Pay Teachers. Ironically, it often technically belongs to the school and system. Otherwise, such reflections are being scrapped by consultants who collate it for branding purposes, which is also counter to the intent … in my opinion. In the end, education has become a competitive rather than a collaborative space that is far from equally distributed.
The other issue is that sharing has moved away from the open web to closed spaces, such as Facebook. This means that the smartest person on Facebook is Facebook.
Maybe I am wrong, too pessimistic. It is just my perspective in the end I guess.
I was intrigued by another post recently discussing theand the point that although they are pushing against platform capitalism, they are still very much in favour of the templated self.
Design the workshop with rich provocations, allow time to get ensconced, respond to the needs of those in front of you.