GranMarcha2008.Org

Steve Bonadio, Vice President of Product Marketing, Softscape, Inc.

Softscape is the global leader in complete people management software solutions that enable organizations to more effectively drive their business performance.

Softscape’s vision and history of innovation is consistently recognized by industry analysts and luminaries. The company’s complete, end-to-end platform natively connects all human resources (HR) and talent functions, including performance management, succession planning, learning, career development, compensation, hiring and recruiting, workforce planning, social networking, and core HR records.

Introduction

One of the techniques available whereby the variety of abilities in a group can be enhanced and constantly been widened is through the process of paired learning. However, not only does this method gives recognition to the fact that one learner has the right to be better than the other, the poorer learner also benefits and develops quicker as the method requires the active involvement of each learner. Further, as more information becomes accessible to learners within institutions of higher learning and without the aid of these institutions, it is required of professional educators in higher education to work more indirectly as a manager of effective learning rather than focusing on the traditional roles of teaching and instruction. This is done in the realization that the overall quality of learning can be improved if learners have the opportunity to clarify, question, apply, and consolidate new knowledge.

The ability to discriminate between students, involve them in and let them contribute to the learning process, and allow them to source from both internal and external learning information, though necessary preconditions for learning success, does not necessarily guarantees success. A more important matter to consider in paired learning is how to make the stated concepts matter to all students and educators involved in the process and to utilize the process in an innovative manner in order to enrich the learning experience.

Purpose

The purpose of this article is to provide a general functional definition of pared-learning and to propose an implementation process that could be followed by institutions of higher learning.

Definition

In general paired-learning refers to the design of a coherent, equal status inter-disciplinary learning setting in which a one-to-one learning setting is created to foster collaborative learning under the guidance of a facilitator, without necessarily employing extra resources, and whereby the facilitator as well as the learners can intellectually, socially and emotionally learn from experiences shared through a process of academic engagement in order to enhance learners understanding of a subject or discipline. A form of tutoring is created whereby interaction and engagement is promoted.

In essence, therefore, paired learning is embedded in a social constructed interdisciplinary, inter-learning unit learning environment whereby a learner engage someone else in knowledge production, creation, improvement and innovation to accomplish more that what he or she was able to accomplish on his or her own. Following this learning approach, the learning structure approach of individual A is blend with the learning structure approach of individual B.

The process

In this section the process of establishing a paired learning environment will be briefly discussed.

1. Create a one-to-one learning setting

In its most ideal form two students should form a study team and should enroll for two or more similar courses at the university. This ensures that the learners are studying the same material. Through the creation of a one-to-one learning setting each student gets an opportunity to actively engage in the construction of knowledge in ways that require of them to learn together as a group. In this regard it is important to get learners to move away from “habit-learning” in which they are seeking the right answers to an approach in which they are urged to seek and develop generalized concepts and models that apply to concrete experiences and to master the ability of intelligent adaptability.

This however cannot be accomplished unless each member of the team does his or her part in the learning process. What is required is that each learner shares his or her experiences as it relates to the discussion or assignment against expectations, communicate with and learn from his learning companion, compare and interpret ideas, draw inferences and propose possible solutions to each other.

2. Paired students have to meet at set intervals under the guidance of a helper

The paired learners should remain together as an established learning community for at least a minimum period of time during the academic year and before re-allocation occurs. The paired learners should meet at regular set intervals; say two or three times a week for around two hours at a time.

These gatherings should happen under the guidance of a helper (teacher or senior student) that may lead the discussions occurring during the learning gatherings. The helper serves as a facilitator and counselor in order to ensure that the learning team remains focus in terms of the study material or assignment. The helper is amongst others responsible for moderating the discussions of the team learners and ensuring that each member of the team assumes their share in the learning process.

3. Discussions at gathering center around a central theme

Discussions and assignments need to be organized and co-coordinated around a central theme which will link the courses or different learning units and which will allow the learners opportunity to understand a specific theme in more depth and within a coherent interdisciplinary and/or inter-learning unit experience. Normally, the pair-groups are given a good deal of freedom in choice of activity, but the general theme of activity should be well defined. Giving the learners freedom in terms of how they would prefer to conduct the proposed activity creates a learning environment that builds on the strengths of individual learners as well as their innovativeness.

The theme “Transportation and destination development” may for example require that learners, source on information from logistics and tourism to pursue knowledge and arrive at a proper synthesis. Better results can be achieved if the theme for discussion is rather well defined, especially at the beginning of the programme, in order to ensure that learners are not overwhelmed by the complexity of the assignment or the information available on the subject matter. One may consider providing the paired-teams with baseline information materials to overcome initial concerns that sufficient material won’t be available.

4. Learning collaboration and coordination with a focus on learning development

Collaboration between educators involved in linked courses is essential to ensure that assignments and activities complement one another. Further, as the focus is on learning development, more that on specific learning outcomes, additional time demands will be placed on those involved, and therefore the introduction of “release-time” or recognition for lecturing-load should be given to those involved. It is further important to have at least one or two advisory committee meetings before the academic year commences in order to construct the assignments and to reach consensus on critical learning issues like ensuring that learners that learners discovers a body of knowledge that in itself is connected and that they are able to share this connectedness with one another.

5. Aim of the paired learning discussions and assignments

The principle aim of paired-learning is normally to discover novelties and secondary to verify what is already known. This gives recognition to the fact that learning is partially innate and partially learned from the social environment. Important to realize is that through pared-learning the learner is able to discover his or her own opinion and voice and will become more and more involved in their own learning. The output created is a diversity institution of higher learning within a traditional disciplined designed structure.

6. Monitor occurrence of learning development

Governance of the learning process, from the perspective of the institution of higher learning is essential to be sure that learning development did indeed occur in an efficient manner. Monitoring and evaluation of the learning process therefore depend on collecting information that could provide answers on:

• The initial intention with a particular assignment or discussion;

• Process dynamics during the execution of the assignment or discussion;

• Outcomes achieved;

• Learning that took place amongst learners, helpers and the educators;

• Comments made by all stakeholders involved in the process; and

• Performance results of learners.

The author has spend years training supervisors, generally in manufacturing. With whatever curriculum he used he would add a chapter on adult learning theory. With this as a framework, he believed that trainees are far more receptive to the training as they have some understanding of why and how the program is constructed to benefit there growth. Very rarely do training facilitators take the time to explain the basics of adult learning to class participants. Indeed, if he has limited facilitator experience the facilitator may not even know the basics of adult learning himself.

The Supervisor: A Key Position

From the outset you need to know that there is no other job more important than that of supervisor. It is the supervisor who helps staff work at their optimal levels. It is also the supervisor that helps make management’s work smoother and more trouble-free than it would otherwise be. But developing the necessary skills to be successful in this pivotal position is a real challenge and does not just happen because the new supervisor used to be a first rate tradesman!

The new supervisor probably has the potential to be an excellent supervisor otherwise his boss would not have appointed him. But it is too much to expect you to “pick up the supervisory skills on the job.” This is why the boss normally provides supervisory training. When and if this occurs, the new supervisor owes it to himself, his boss and the training facilitator to do the best he can to participate fully in the session discussions and other learning activities.

As a prerequisite to training, the new supervisory needs to understand how best to get the most of any supervisory training he may receive.

1. Learning Activity: The Benefits of Training to You and Others
Or: What’s in it for Me (WIIFM)!

Firstly, we need to consider the importance of participating in supervisory training. “Because the boss wants me to” is an incomplete answer. To get the most from it and, in turn, be prepared to put a lot into it, the new supervisor needs to see the importance of it and the benefits to him, his staff, his boss and the company as a whole.

Here is a partial list of the importance of undertaking training.

It will help you become :

A better communicator

Know how to develop a more positive work environment

More cost-effective

More satisfied on the job

Develop more productive workers

More confident in your abilities

More self-aware and self-confident

A person with better morale

Increased in skills and make so fewer errors

A better leader able to gain respect and discipline others respectfully

A better problem solver

More stree free

A more collaborative team leader

A strong team spirit developer

Less likely to face personal liability lawsuits

Better respected by staff

A better time manager and more highly organized

2. Basics of Learning

It is important to know how you learn for at least two reasons:
When you proceed through a training experience, you will have a better idea of what is taking place in the learning process and you are therefore more likely to respond positively to the experience.

Good supervisors are also coaches and trainers of their staff. Therefore, it is essential for you to understand basic training theory and practice so you can increase your training skills.

A.Learning as Change

The objective of learning is to bring about changes in your behavior so you can do things differently. Learning can be transformational–it can change your life forever. As you acquire new knowledge and skills, you begin to see new potentials and opportunities that you perhaps had not thought possible beforehand. Learning can be a difficult experience as you strive to break through old prejudices and habits, but it also can bring many rewards.

The focus in a training program is on your learning. The flip side is that the person standing up front is a facilitator of your learning, more than he is a teacher or a trainer.
The focus, therefore, is on you, the learner, not the facilitator (trainer).

B.Active and Positive Participation

People learn in different ways, but one thing is clear: one of the best ways that all people learn is through active and positive participation, i.e. doing, discussing, listening actively, talking, being keen and enthusiastic about what you learn.
It is important that you become actively involved in what happens during the training. Being active and positive will ensure you learn close to 100% of what there is to learn. Being passive, not participating, listening with one ear, day dreaming is a waste of your time, the facilitator’s time and the company’s money. You need to make the effort for learning to happen.

C.Self-Directed Learning

A component of learning is the concept of self-directed learning, that is, a student has “learned on his/her own.” Research has shown that 75% of the learning that adults do is self-directional as opposed to institutional or employer provided learning. Write down the many things that you have learned on your own:

Do you dream to get a college degree? Want to give your career the required boost by acquiring an Under-Graduate or Post-Graduate degree? Are your dreams of becoming a college graduate fading due to the lack of time or money?

At hqessays.com you can buy essays and dissertations that are custom written exactly to your needs and specifications. Our prices are very reasonable and the quality of the custom papers is premium – they all completed in strict accordance to the highest academic standards.

Who says that you can only get college education by going to big university or attending regular classes? Distance learning has eliminated this requirement completely. There are many universities out there which provide legitimate college degrees through this process.

With the rising cost of college education, many people are finding it almost impossible to attend regular colleges. Distance learning universities are best for such people. They can save a lot of money on hostel accommodation and many other expenses by studying from their homes.

This type of studying system is also best for people who want to go back to colleges after a gap of few years. After school, many students find themselves torn between the option of investing few more years in studying or doing something else like working or taking care of their family. But distance learning gives them a chance to complete their studies as and when they are ready.

Another great way of distance learning study is that it enables students to pursue their career along with their studies. As most regular colleges require students to attend back-to-back classes, working in that setting is next to impossible for students. But with distance learning universities, students can earn as well as study the subject they want.

As we all know, most colleges have very limited seats and not everyone gets admissions. Distance learning courses are coming up as a great option for students who fail to get admissions in regular colleges. You can choose from various distance learning colleges which offer a large number of courses and degrees.

custom essays – ProfEssays.com is a leading custom essay writing company. We provide our services to UK, US and Australian students. We can complete any type of essay at any level of difficultly. Order essay paper which is made to impress.

I meet all sorts of
educators in the day job, but my opportunities to talk with them for any length
of time are limited.  I am a
conversational transient. A conversation started with one educator in one place
is abandoned only to be picked up and carried on with another educator in another place,
before being abandoned, again and again and again.  In place and in conversation I am always moving
on; moving on to another place, to another school, to another classroom, to another
school hall, to another staffroom to work with another syndicate, another
department, another team, and another teacher.

I have learned to snatch
opportunities to talk about the things that matter most wherever and whenever I
can.  As well as snatching torn corners
and strips of conversation, I rip images of the ordinary from each place locating
them carefully in the corners of memory. 
For the ordinary of doing school in one place is the extraordinary of the
next.

The loneliness and lack
of any long term conversation in my daily wandering is disguised for the most
part by a nomadic lifestyle that allows me to embrace the unexpected.  No two days are the same.  The rhythm of a fresh start to each day is unlike
the rhythm available to me when I was an educator pinned to a thick waxy layer of
institutional belonging.  And I toss
between the two – do I want to allow myself to be etherised and pinned and play
where the ongoing conversation is able to be explored in depth or do I want to
keep on living as a conversational transient skittering across the wild uncertain
surfaces of what matters most? It is that old “do I want to be a pet mouse or a
wilding mouse?” thing all over again

Whilst downing a coffee and peeling open the itinerant’s lunchtime muesli
bar earlier this year I was approached by three teachers who wanted to talk about issues I had
raised in the opening keynote.  One
wanted to talk further about e-learning through juggling and PowerPoint ,
another wanting to talk about using SOLO Taxonomy in her post graduate research
and a third wanting to talk about parallels between “positive deviance” and the
Tongan Kainga as an approach to creating educational, social and economic success of Tongan's in New
Zealand.

It was the positive deviance conversation that excited me most –
for I was able to re-start a conversation I first started in Artichoke in 2007.
 Ever
since I read and blogged about  Better: A Surgeon's Notes on Performance
by Atul Gawande  
I have looked out for a conversation
about positive deviance – one that could be used to make a difference in
educational policy and programmes.  I am
certain you can knock out an edu_ground hog day list, most of us can.  Those issues/outcomes that despite numerous
initiatives/ projects/ contestable funding etc we consistently fail to change
in classrooms and schools. Indeed the enduring nature of things we never seem
to fix when “doing school” makes even the most enthusiast educator cynical in
time – or else sees them prone to “this too will pass thinking” behaviour like
becoming educational facilitators or consultants – or adopting other escapology
tactics like applying for study awards – anything that allows them to keep thinking
about school but at a safe distance from the doing of it. If you don't believe me check out the Twitter
stream balance of tweets from educators who have just made “a presentation” to
show someone else “how to do teaching” against those “who are doing the teaching”
and tweet about their classroom planning. I am always fearful that one day we
will run out of the people prepared to keep doing school and be left with those who want to tell us all how to do it.   

Gawande’s chapter “On Washing Hands” (describing the
inability of medical institutions to persuade their staff to adopt simple
measures to prevent hospital acquired infections) reminded me of the simple
issues that we never seem to resolve in school. 
The Positive Deviance Projects showed
me that this approach can stretch much further than changing hand washing behaviours
in hospitals. 

We attack the “unmovables” in education by bringing in
“experts”, “facilitators”, and specially funded research programmes etc into
our schools –But in every community there are certain individuals (the
"Positive Deviants") whose special practices/ strategies/ behaviours
enable them to find better solutions to prevalent community problems than their
neighbours who have access to the same resources.

Positive deviance is a
culturally appropriate development approach that is tailored to the specific
community in which it is used. 

By relying on identifying people within a community to
model the behaviours for change, we ensure these changes are doable, manageable
and achievable and avoid charges that so commonly arise when “developed” world’s
institutions see themselves as catering to “underdeveloped” people’s needs. The
results from the Positive Deviance Projects persuades me that we might be
better off looking for and funding interventions that explore “positive deviance”
within a community and within a school.  

All of which was why I was so excited when Tofi’a followed up on our snatched lunchtime exchange
by sending me a copy of a recent Masters Research Thesis from Massey University
written by Sione Tu’itahi. 

Langa Fonua: In Search
of Success. How a Tongan Kainga Strived to be Socially and Economically Successful
in New Zealand by Sione Tu’itahi is a description of intergenerational positive
deviance and what I have long been looking for. 
You can get a copy from The Directorate Pasifika@Massey Office, Albany
Campus, Auckland.

The thesis “Langa
Fonua” argues that “to find solutions to the low socio-economic status of
Tongans in New Zealand, research should focus on their demonstrated strengths and positive achievements,
rather than their deficits.” p82 Tu'itahi uses the
Tongan model of fonua – ongoing inter-connected relationship between people and
environment (reciprocity) as the framework for understanding the successful progress of the Tongan Tahi kainga over the last 30 years.  

He reveals how migration from a small island in the Ha’apai
group in the Kingdom of Tonga, to the main island Tongatapu to New Zealand. The
United States and Australia was the result of a consistent vision and strategy,
a model that each generation followed that focused on balancing material,
intellectual and spiritual development and contributing to the wider community.
The Tahi kainga worked and studied hard but critical was how the kainga defined
“success” (ikuna) and how this became an influential narrative for the success
of each generation that followed. Success was a holistic construct and nuanced around: 

• Spiritual well
  being. Mo’ui Lelei Fakalaumalie
  
• Intellectual well
  being. Mo’ui Lelei Faka’atamai
• Physical health and
  well being. Mo’ui Lelei Fakasino
• Collective kainga
  health and well being. Mo’ui lelei e Kainga
• Contribution to
  Society. Tokoni ki he fonua

Langa Fonua uses observation,
interviews, focus groups and two traditional Tongan methods of constructing and
sharing knowledge and social realities.

I was quite taken
by these traditional methodologies and how well they expressed what was missing
from the day job.  

Potalanoa (talking
into the night) refers to a form of conversation in which Tongan participants
analyse and reflect deeply on a subject or range of topics and issues that leads
to constructing of new ideas or deconstructing and rearranging of existing
ones(Manu’atu, 2000) (Cited in Tu’itahi 2009 page 16)

Fakalotofale’ia (creating
within the house) is the in-house meeting of the extended kainga to investigate
perspectives, facts and Tongan socioeconomic realities, and to plan on how to
apply knowledge skills and information for the benefit of the extended kainga.  (Tu’itahi 2009 page 16)

Apart from discovering positive deviance research that
could be useful when imagining how best to enhance academic outcomes for Tongan students, the thesis was a
powerful reminder that as a conversational transient in the day job I need to
make more time for potalanoa and fakalotofale’ia
with Artichoke in the evenings.   

Source: Artichoke

Whatever happened between “Me” and “You”?

It was easy to understand our relationship in the beginning.
It was what I like to think of as “a giant romance of primitive life and
unfettered love” – a "Me Tarzan, you Jane" kind of thing.

Me: (pointing to herself) Consumer.
You: (he points at her) Consumer.
Me: And you? (she points at him) You?
You: (stabbing himself proudly in the chest) Producer, Producer.
Me: (emphasizing his correct response) Producer.
You: (poking back and forth each time) Consumer. Producer. Consumer. Producer…

With apologies to Tarzan, the Ape Man (1932)

I gave you money for the goods and services you produced – “Me
Consumer, you Producer.”  

We still have “a giant romance of primitive life and
unfettered love” but now instead of Me:
(pointing to herself) Consumer….You: (stabbing
himself proudly in the chest) Producer, Producer… there is a Me (producer) You (consumer) kind of thing going on.

Web 2.0 means I produce my own content and you, well you (and the other wannabe manipulators of
the cloud) become the consumer.  You don’t
care about the quality or integrity of what I produce it is enough that I
broadcast content, for by taking control of the distribution channels, and
using the information I produce, you profit. 
You are Google, Apple, Amazon
… and the rest.

It is a simple relationship where you leverage off my
activity. And the more I/me can produce
the more profit you generate – so
you work hard to make production easy and attractive for me and the students I
teach.

"The more links we click,
pages we view, and transactions we make, the more intelligence the Web makes,
the more economic value it gains, and the more profit it throws off." Carr
2008 cited in Lovink 2010.

In the educational world I inhabit the “me” do not question
your generosity, we do not pause to ask why you shower us with so many
applications and services. We love you big time – we love your work – we love
what you do.  In the guise of e-learning
we not only use your production tools, feed your clouds, and encourage our
students to do likewise, we also worship what you provide. 

Watching the activities of edu-bloggers and self proclaimed elearning
experts online it is a little like watching the ouroboros consuming its own
tail. In a strange act of self-worship we use your production tools to worship
your production tools.  In a testimony of
our faith in you we create edu_blog posts on “Ten best XXX apps for educators”,
we enshrine your apps in purpose built displays and descriptions in edu_wikis,
and we upload video to explain how to use your apps and production tools. 

In the educational world we are your fevered but reverent producers.
You, well you must know where you stand in this relationship.   

Web 2.0 has three distinguishing
features: it is easy to use; it facilitates the social element; and users can
upload their own content in whatever form, be it pictures, videos or text. It
is all about providing users with free publishing and production platforms. The
focus on how to make a profit from free user−generated content came in response
to the dotcom crash. Geert Lovink MyBrain.net The colonization of
real−time and other trends in Web 2.0

Web 2.0 has changed more than our me you relationship – Web 2.0 has changed me.  I am no longer the same me – I am no longer a privileged node in a network – I am no longer
in charge – my me is blurred – With
Web 2.0 I am a me that is part of a
centralised infrastructure that is you –
and you identify me and profit from,
every click I/me make –

With Web 2.0 I am a “controlled and manipulated” me.

With Web 2.0 I am a “commodified” me.

Being commodified is
an odd sensation – it makes me wonder about the temporal me.

Am I more me at some
times than others? And if so when am I most me?

This feels like a vampiric question or even a Dr Jekyll and
Mr Hyde thing.

With Web 2.0 it seems I am me in the present more than I am me in the past. The information I am encouraged to produce focuses
on knowing me in real time not me in any past time.

You – the
controller of the centralised infrastructure – the clouds and the data streams
– have an insatiable appetite for “the real-time data” me.   And this valuing of the
real time data me privileges the present.

The pacemaker of the real−time
Internet is "microblogging", but we can also think of the social
networking sites and their urge to pull as many real−time data out of its users
as possible: "What are you doing?" Give us your self−shot.
"What's on your mind?" Expose your impulses. Frantically updated
blogs are part of this inclination, as are frequently updated news sites. The
driving technology behind this is the constant evolution of RSS feeds, which
makes it possible to get instant updates of what's happening elsewhere on the
web. The proliferation of mobile phones plays a significant background role in
"mobilizing" your computer, social network, video and photo camera,
audio devices, and eventually also your TV. The miniaturization of hardware
combined with wireless connectivity makes it possible for technology to become
an invisible part of everyday life. Web 2.0 applications respond to this trend
and attempt to extract value out of every situation we find ourselves in.  The Machine constantly wants to know what we
think, what choices we make, where we go, who we talk to. Geert Lovink MyBrain.net
The colonization of real−time and other trends in Web 2.0 2010 http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2010-03-18-lovink-en.html

Asking “when am I me?”
makes me realise that as a real-time me, I am an uncomplicated me, a me trapped in the present. This me is a product of a Simon Schama like “machine driven universe”. You know me by my most recent keyboard interactions with the screen

"For if the entire history
of landscape in the West is indeed just a mindless race toward a machine-driven
universe, uncomplicated by myth, metaphor, and allegory, where measurement, not
memory, is the absolute arbiter of value, where our ingenuity is our tragedy,
then we are indeed trapped in the engine of our self-destruction." Simon
Schama Landscape and Memory Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1995 http://www.amazon.com/Landscape-Memory-Simon-Schama/dp/0679735127

Who is the real-time
me?

The real-time me is the real “real-time me”. There is no
place anymore for an alternative me; no space for the virtual “real-time me”.
The “controllers of the cloud”, the “new overlords of the distribution channels”,
want the real “real time me”.  They have
no time for an alternative me – the Artichoke me, they want only the real me.  The new relationship between me and you values
the old order, the existing power hierarchies’ of gender, race and position.

We constantly login, create
profiles in order to present our "selves" on the global market place
of employment, friendship and love. We can have multiple passions but only one
certified ID. Trust is the oil of global capitalism and the security state,
required by both sides in any transaction or exchange. In every rite de
passage, the authorities must trust us before they let both our bodies and
information through. The old idea that the virtual is there to liberate you
from your old self has collapsed. Geert Lovink MyBrain.net The
colonization of real−time and other trends in Web 2.0 2010

And when I give you information about the real time me I
give you control and power. I give you an enduring digital memory of me that
acts as both a spatial and temporal panopticon.

If Orwell was right, and … “Who controls the past controls
the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” Then by becoming a producer
in your Web2.0 world I have given you control over my past, my present and my
future.

And I am so excited by the ability to upload my own content
and report on whatever I am thinking or doing in a real time stream of content
that I neglect to interrogate the consequences. 
What does it mean when I give up control and power, when I become part
of someone else’s content stream, when I offer all that I do and think as an
enduring digital memory?  What does it
mean when I encourage my students to act in the same way?

Viktor Mayer-Schönberger has explored some potential responses
to the challenges of this new relationship, the challenges of an enduring
digital memory in “Delete.  The Virtue of
Forgetting in the Digital Age”. 

The first four chapters of”Delete” book focus on the
consequences of failing to forget. They are well argued and although this is a
topical issue for many Web 2.0 commentators Mayer-Schönberger introduced insights,
ideas and content that were new to me.  His
thinking around the role of remembering provided a far deeper analysis and
critique of the topic than Gordon Bell and Jim Gemmell managed to collect in
their book “Total Recall – How the e-memory revolution will change everything.”  Bell and Gemmell offer valorising description; in contrast Mayer-Schönberger offers critical analysis
of the causes and consequence of remembering everything.  How remembering everything overload me with
information, information that impairs my ability to reason, information I would
be better off forgetting.

Delete is by far the more interesting read.  

The last two chapters of “Delete” – Chapter V “Potential
responses”, and Chapter VI “Re-introducing Forgetting” best captured my
attention.

Mayer-Schönberger has a useful categorisation of responses
to living with an enduring digital memory. 
So useful in fact that I spent a happy hour creating a CMap that used his
classification to explore these in the context creating enduring digital
memories through student eportfolios – an enduring affection of educators and
one that I have been hearing about at edu_conferences since 2002. I could
equally have explored the huge amount of data schools collect on their students
and their families.

 Mayer-Schönberger
clarifies that when we increase the amount of information about ourselves and
our students in digital memory we risk:  

1.     
Loss of control and power over the information we
place online.

2.     
Exposing student information and data in a digital
panopticon (both spatial and temporal) where selective pieces of their information
and data are under surveillance to people, and for purposes and times we have
little to no control over.      

3.     
Overloading with information we are better off
forgetting, information that impairs reasoning.

What I enjoyed most was his interrogation of seven suggested
responses to the challenges arising from the creation of enduring digital
content. My notes describing each of the categories are included below – you will
have to read the chapters to fully appreciate the critique.

Responding to the
challenges of an enduring digital memory

The Relationship
Responses:

Three of Mayer- Schönberger’s responses are based around the
individual and relationships.  He explores
ways in which the individual can decrease the flow of information between one
person and another – between me and you. And critiques the potential success of
each.

Responses framed
around

1. Social Norms and
Individual Self Control

Firstly an individual’s power to decrease the flow of
information could arise through mechanisms of social norms and individual self control.  Personal behavioural change – Mayer- Schönberger
refers to this as digital abstinence. So once educators and students appreciate
“the implications of abandoning forgetting when digitising information we will
stop providing information to others and digital memory of these outcomes will
cease to exist.   

2. Formal Laws

Secondly an individual’s power to decrease the flow of
information could arise through mechanisms of formal laws.  These information privacy rights would afford
students “with a legally recognised claim over their personal information,
thereby empowering them to maintain information control on whether and how the information
is shared.” This would include a Purpose Limitation Principle whereby “the
recipient of the personal information can only use it for the purposes to which
you consented and no others”.   

 3.  Architecture

Thirdly an individual’s power to decrease the flow of
information could arise through mechanisms of architecture – through a Digital
Privacy Rights Infrastructure. Mayer-Schönberger argues that a Digital Rights
Management (DRM) infrastructure similar to that developed for information in
the context of copyright (movies, music, games, digital books) is used in the context
of forgetting any personal information. 
Your personal data is paired with meta-information about who can use it
and how. Media players check this meta information and refuse to play information
content if usage is not appropriately authorised. Individuals could add meta
data to their personal information detailing who can use it for what purpose
and for what price. 

Mayer-Schönberger notes this would require laws to prevent
reverse engineering, requiring surveillance to protect us from surveillance – we
create a panopticon to protect us from a panopticon.

The Cognition, Decision
Making and Time Responses:

Responses framed
around

1. Social Norms and
Individual Self Control

Here Mayer-Schönberger suggests reducing the amount of information in digital memory by mechanisms
of social norms and individual self control. He suggests that Cognitive
adjustment at the cultural level will let us disregard old facts and
information.  We will accept that people change
and pay heed to only the recent online.

2.  Formal Laws

The formal laws approach could be used to reduce the amount of information in
digital memory if we introduce an Information Ecology that allows for
deliberate regulatory constraint of “what information can be collected, stored
and thus remembered by who and for how long. However, Mayer-Schönberger notes
that recent trends have seen a loosening of existing constraints on information
in digital memory rather than a tightening and increasing calls for
transparency legislation to fight corruption both of which would compromise this
response.

3. Technology    

 The technological
response to limiting the amount of digital content online made me smile.  It suggests a Gordon Bell like experience but
with one notable difference the Gordon Bell like content collected is shared
with everyone.  So we limit the negatives
of storing content online by increasing the amount of information in digital
memory.  This proposal identifies that it
is not digital memory per se that is the problem – it is the selective nature
of this digital memory that compromises us. 
“When everything is transparent surveillance loses its power.”

The Re-Introducing
Forgetting Response.

Mayer-Schönberger’s proposal for re-introducing forgetting
by “making forgetting just a tiny bit easier than remembering” is elegant –
both simple and powerful in its scope. 
By prompting the user to set expiration dates each time they save and
upload information and information bits – content, detail, comments – to
digital memory they confront users with the problem. I enjoyed Mayer-Schönberger’s
analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of re-introducing forgetting (for
example, it fails to address privacy concerns). When the control remains with
the producer of the content, and we shift the default back from retaining
information forever to forgetting it after different time periods we restore something
of what it is to live well with technology, we restore what it is to be human.  We allow a giant romance of primitive life and unfettered love to continue.

Source: Artichoke

… you will make something of the fact that the word “competition”
only occurs once in the New Zealand Curriculum document.

Or “Why everything you have been told about genetics, talent
and IQ is wrong”

Or “What students are” versus “What students do”

I will admit that I am a bit of a fanboy for the outcomes
based thinking of educationalist and academic John Biggs.

I like using multiple alternative representations when I am trying
to understand new ideas and ways of knowing and Biggs and Collis’ Structured
Overview of Learning Outcomes is a representative framework that is never too
far away when I stumble over something new.

Nudging up against SOLO Taxonomy is “a wash” experience for
most of the educators I work with.  Not a
“dry creek bed or gulch that temporarily fills with water after a heavy rain” kind
of wash experience – that fleeting post conference charismatic keynoter euphoria
kind of “wash” – but rather a “wash experience” where the overwhelming simplicity and
power of the idea that washes over you leaves a small load of pigment that binds
to all the fibres in the raw canvas of your experience and learning.

The effect of SOLO Taxonomy on the interpretation of teaching
and learning is long lasting, it   pervades your imaginings, and it marks you in
a way that influences all that follows.

My response to nudging up against SOLO Taxonomy in 2003 has been a sharpening of my educative
focus – I now use the coarse focus knob, the fine focus knob and the diaphragm to
explore the fine detail in “What students do”. 

To do this I try to be very clear about the;

• Intended learning
  outcomes – what I want students to do,

• Learning experiences that will help students achieve the
  intended learning outcomes – small steps that help students do, and the

• Self-assessment that helps students determine if what they have
  done meets the intended learning outcome. 
  

My attention is distracted every now and again by “What
students are” as is the attention of every policy maker, academic, school and
teacher.  The following extract from an
academic’s  report to a local school reveals this well.  

Traditionally teacher
expectations studies have examined why teachers have high expectations for some
students and not for others. For example, the literature shows that teachers
tend to have higher expectations for New Zealand European students than they do
for Maori (Rubie-Davies, Hattie, & Hamilton, 2006), that they have higher expectations for
students from middle class socioeconomic backgrounds than they do for students
from poorer areas (Jussim, Smith, Madon, & Palumbo, 1998), that they have higher expectations for
boys in maths and science and for girls in reading (Qing, 1999) and that they have lower expectations for
students who have a diagnostic label, e.g. ADHD,  than they do for the same student who does
not have a label (Stinnett, Crawford, Gillespie, Cruce, & Langford, 2001). These studies ask the question: what is it
about a student that means their teacher may have high or low expectations for
him or her? Rubie-Davies
et al 2009.

And there is no end to the edu_bloggers whose online musings
reveal their preferred educative focus as “what students are”.

But I am wary when I find myself thinking like this.

“What students are …” encourages us to place students on
some kind of educational continuum, to blur these students across different gross
demographic palettes of age, race, sex, sexuality, physicality, personality,
culture, language, gender, family, class, and locale as explanation.

Gross demographics encourages us to smear students across a
continuum from; gifted to special needs, engaged to disengaged, 21^st
Century learner to 19^th Century luddite, digital native to digital
immigrant, male to female, Maori to Pakeha, endemic to introduced, ESOL to
monolingual , pinko grey to café au lait, North Shore to Westie, first born to
last born, extrovert to introvert, kinaesthetic to visual learner, heterosexual
to LGB, endomorph to mesomorph, South Aucklander to South Islander, middle
class to upper class, high decile school to low decile school etc.   

This thinking encourages us to set up educational policy and
lobby groups calling for educational funding by claiming that “This group of
students are failing to achieve because they are [insert gross demographic] as
a consequence they have special needs that are not currently being met … and as
a consequence of having unmet needs we need access to [insert figure sought]
from “budget education” to redress the inequality.”

Gross demographic thinking about “what students are” though
seemingly easy to characterise and communicate, pretends to a quantitative reliability
and validity that simply does not exist. 
We assume a conceptual stability that ignores the influence of life
world attributes.  

The gross demographics of “who students are” is unstable –
it interacts with life experiences, interests and orientations, with values,
dispositions sensibility, with communication and interpersonal styles.  This interaction introduces ongoing differences
within the demographic that are far greater than the difference claimed for between
demographics.

There is no gross demographic that determines with any
degree of validity or reliability what a student is.

And thinking about “what students are” involves us in a
second betrayal. 

Even if gross demographics could be shown to be stable and
identifiable adopting gross demographics as explanation for success and failure
carries an underlying assumption of blame – it suggests that “what students are”
explains why students fail –

All of this thinking about “what students do” rather than “what
students are” is why I have much enjoyed reading “The Genius in All of Us: Why Everything You've Been Told About Genetics,
Talent, and IQ Is Wrong” by David Shank. 

The Genius in All of Us is a book that undermines and
reveals in equal measure.  It is a book
that educators and government policy makers should interrogate if they want to
understand why the nature nurture debate is both mis-framed and damaging to the
way we educate young people for achievement.

Shenk’s argument is that current research into the dynamic
interactions that occur between genes and the environment mean that we have got
our notions of “giftedness” and achievement all wrong.  He uses research and wide ranging examples to
argue that it is the interaction of genes and the environment (GXE) that
determines who we are, that intelligence and its representation in great
achievement is a process not a thing.

Intelligence is not an innate aptitude, hardwired at conception or in
the womb, but a collection of developing skills driven by the interaction
between genes and environment.  No one is
born with a pre-determined amount of intelligence.  Intelligence (and IQ scores) can be
improved.  Few adults come close to their
true intellectual potential. Shenk 2010 p 29    

Much like his previous book "The Forgetting: Alzheimer's: Portrait of an Epidemic"  (which helped me better understand Alzheimer’s
and other dementia related conditions) Shenk provides extensive support in his
sources and notes section to clarify and amplify his argument. His extensive
note making reminds me of the scholarship of Ivan Illich; it provides a
valuable insight into assumptions and misconceptions made around achievement.  "The Genius in All of Us" is a well reasoned and thoughtful book.

Thinking about achievement as a process, and acknowledging
the extraordinary plasticity of our genes interaction with environment, leads
Shenk to make a series of recommendations for parents.

1.  Believe each child
has enormous potential.

2.  Set high expectations,
demonstrate persistence and resilience but do not use emotional rewards for success
or punishments for failure.

3.  Reward persistence
intermittently, develop delayed gratification. 
Model self-control and give kids practice.

4. Embrace failure – present, monitor and modulate
challenges.

 Many educators are
also parents and would claim they understand intelligence as developmental.  Yet the ways we parent and the ways in which we
do school – frame policy and provide programme – betray us. Reading Shenk will
clarify how much of the research we undertake (and the programmes we provide
for teaching and learning) suggest a mind set of genetic determinism rather
than GXE development.

The chapter that captured my interest unpacked the significant
role competition plays in achievement.

I know I generalise here but “competition” is not revered in
teaching and learning in New Zealand primary and secondary schools. We tend to
frame competition as harmful and unnecessary in terms of achievement.  You just need to leaf through the New Zealand
Curriculum to see that the notion of competition it is absent from any
recommendations around the effective pedagogies. The notion of competition is
remarkable for its absence.

If you are someone who likes to count things – the word
“Competition” only occurs once in the New Zealand Curriculum document.

Students
learn most effectively when they have time and opportunity to engage with,
practise, and transfer new learning. This means that they need to encounter new
learning a number of times and in a variety of different tasks or contexts. It
also means that when curriculum coverage
and student understanding are in competition, the teacher may decide to
cover less but cover it in greater depth. New Zealand Curriculum p34

Shenk’s writing helped me better understand the flaws in the
arguments that have been used to eschew a competitive culture developing within
New Zealand schools and classrooms.

The problem is that different people have very different attitudes
towards competition.  In 1938, Harvard
psychologist Henry A. Murray proposed that human beings could be separated into
two distinctive competitive personalities: HAMs (“high in achievement
motivation”) and LAMs (“low in achievement motivation”).  HAMs enjoy and perform better under directly
competitive conditions than they do under non-competitive conditions.  LAMs dislike competition, do not seek it out,
and are less happy and productive when pushed into it.  They do better when pursuing so-called
mastery goals – improvement of a skill in comparison to oneself rather than to
others. P121

In New Zealand these different attitudes HAM and LAM have
been aligned with gender demographics – claims are made that the broad structure
of our National Certificate for Educational Achievement (NCEA) awards removes
competition and as such favours girls (who are represented as LAMs) over boys
(who are represented as HAM’s). 

Interestingly Shenk reports research that reveals there is “no fixed male or
female competive biology”.  

“In Western societies, a higher proportion of men are HAMs and a higher
proportion of women are LAMs …. this is not universal or genetically
hardwired.”    P121

We are once
again betrayed by the ease of gross demographic thinking – Note to self:
I must
remember this the next time gender arguments around competition
resurface in
the media. 

A more interesting question is raised by Shenk. It is one I
wish educators in New Zealand had grappled with before rejecting competition
per se.

Shenk asks us to imagine “healthy rivalry”.

“How can we best create classrooms, offices, and communities where
competitive instincts are rewarded but where less competitive individuals also
feel energised rather than suffocated?

His suggestions startled me, they aligned so well with John
Bigg’s proposals for engaging students through constructive alignment using
SOLO Taxonomy. Refer: Teaching for Quality Learning at University.  Third Edition John Biggs and Catherine
Tang.  

“Not surprisingly, the answer turns out to be making sure
that near-term tasks are clear and meaningful. 
If short-term tasks can be made relevant to log term goals, researchers
have found that even LAMs will dive in and relish the challenge.  This fits perfectly with Ericsson’s
“deliberate practice” – the satisfaction of working hard to master near-term
goals, learning to enjoy the process rather than focus on the large gulf
between current abilities and the far off ideal.  Shenk P122

It is not a contradiction to maintain high expectations of
every student, and to show compassion and creativity for those who inevitably,
do not immediately meet these expectations. 
Failure should be seen as a learning opportunity rather than a
revelation of a student’s innate limits. 
Shenk P123

Shenk’s solution is for educators to focus on “What students
do” rather than what turns out to be a genetic deterministic based
misrepresentation and myth about “What students are”. 

And once we understand “achievement” as developmental rather
than fixed perhaps we will be less bothered by “failure” which we will understand
and more importantly represent to students as developmental.

We should have taken more notice of Heraclitus.

Source: Artichoke