We, Me and the Network: Girl Scouts Leadership & Development Conf Keynote
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
3 gostaram•495 visualizações
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (19)
Destaque
Semelhante a We, Me and the Network: Girl Scouts Leadership & Development Conf Keynote
Semelhante a We, Me and the Network: Girl Scouts Leadership & Development Conf Keynote (20)
Mais de Nancy Wright White
Mais de Nancy Wright White (20)
We, Me and the Network: Girl Scouts Leadership & Development Conf Keynote
- 1. Learning Everywhere! Me, We and the Networks Girl Scout Learning & Development Conference 2010 Nancy White - Full Circle Associates http://www.fullcirc.com @NancyWhite Talk Wiki: http://bit.ly/bnWwtX http://www.flickr.com/photos/papalars/3032193121/
- 2. “ Doubt is a wonderful thing.” Richard Feynman
- 3. “ Doubt is a wonderful thing.” Richard Feynman
- 6. Find an object ...a piece of paper and a pen...
- 7. Learning
- 8. Reciprocal Apprenticeship (Levy) http://www.flickr.com/photos/zachstern/87431231/
- 9. Reciprocal Apprenticeship was a rare form of Jedi apprenticeship and has hardly been practiced since the Cleansing of the Nine Houses. This is where two Jedi were both Masters and Apprentices to each other. The most famous pair to be under Reciprocal Apprenticeship were Jedi Masters Kyle Katarn and Mara Jade Skywalker of the New Jedi Order. http://misc.thefullwiki.org/Reciprocal_apprenticeship
- 12. Reciprocal Apprenticeship Learning Belonging Applying Our Gifts
- 13. Reciprocal Apprenticeship Learning Belonging Applying Our Gifts Fear Control
- 16. Tech + Social: Technology has fundamentally changed how we can be together
- 17. #1 People Forms (me, we, network) and why this matters
- 18. http://www.flickr.com/photos/ecstaticist/2918198742/in/set-72157603453505459/ Go Solo? Think exploring…
- 19. Pairs, triads and very small groups –
- 20. Fly with the flock?
- 24. Many: Networks We: Communities Me: the Individual Personal identity, interest & trajectory (girl, facilitator,leader) Bounded membership; group identity, shared interest, human centered. (Troop, district,etc.) Boundaryless; fuzzy, intersecting interests, object centered sociality (Engeström) (Girl Scouting)
- 25. Many: Networks We: Communities Me: the Individual Consciousness, confidence level, risk tolerance, styles, emotion Distinct power/trust dynamics, shared forward movement or strong blocking, stasis, attention to maintenance, language Flows around blocks, less cohesion, distributed power/trust, change
- 26. Many: Networks We: Communities Me: the Individual Badges, journals, email, portfolios, Facebook page, etc. Meetings, confs., projects, wikis, group blogs, collaborative platforms… Facebook, ELGG, Twitter, YouTube, Wikipedia,etc…
- 29. #2 Polarities
- 30. TOGETHERNESS SEPARATENESS http://www.flickr.com/photos/angerboy/201582453/
- 31. community time community space shifting engagement & rhythm...
- 32. http://www.flickr.com/photos/worldcafe/227358678 / Participation Reification
- 33. Vocabularies, tools, concepts, badges, songs, methods, stories, pictures, … Conversing, singing, experimenting, practicing, learning, planning…
- 35. INDIVIDUAL GROUP
- 36. Designed for groups, experienced as individuals Does not imply homogeneity Multi-membership Attention
- 37. togetherness separateness participation reification individual group rhythm interaction identity F2F Community platform
- 39. #3 Roles (yeah, yours!)
- 41. facilitators community leaders technology stewards network weavers Independent thinkers
- 42. So w hat?
- 43. Learning together Me, we, network polarities REFLECTION & ACTION!
- 45. 15% solution Noticing and using the influence, discretion and power individuals have right now. – Keith McCandless
- 46. Epilogue Contact Nancy White nancyw at fullcirc dot com http:www.fullcirc.com @NancyWhite http://www.flickr.com/photos/photogg19/4586557339/
Notas do Editor
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/papalars/3032193121/ By papalars Andrew E. http://www.flickr.com/photos/papalars/3032193121/ http://bit.ly/bnWwtX
- We have found it of paramount importance that in order to progress, we must recognize our ignorance and leave room for doubt. "The Value of Science," address to the National Academy of Sciences (Autumn 1955) http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman The Pleasure of Finding Things Out : The Best Short Works of Richard Feynman, edited by Jeffery Robbins ISBN 0-14-029034-6 * I can live with doubt, and uncertainty, and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I have approximate answers, and possible beliefs, and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I’m not absolutely sure of anything, and in many things I don’t know anything about, such as whether it means anything to ask why we’re here, and what the question might mean. I might think about a little, but if I can’t figure it out, then I go to something else. But I don’t have to know an answer. I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is, as far as I can tell, possibly. It doesn’t frighten me.
- We have found it of paramount importance that in order to progress, we must recognize our ignorance and leave room for doubt. "The Value of Science," address to the National Academy of Sciences (Autumn 1955) http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman The Pleasure of Finding Things Out : The Best Short Works of Richard Feynman, edited by Jeffery Robbins ISBN 0-14-029034-6 * I can live with doubt, and uncertainty, and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I have approximate answers, and possible beliefs, and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I’m not absolutely sure of anything, and in many things I don’t know anything about, such as whether it means anything to ask why we’re here, and what the question might mean. I might think about a little, but if I can’t figure it out, then I go to something else. But I don’t have to know an answer. I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is, as far as I can tell, possibly. It doesn’t frighten me.
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/27387655@N05/4121432116/ By arcx1972 No real name given This photo was taken
- 1. Find an object in your possession 2. Without overthinking it, think of how it can be a metaphor for learning in your life. 3. Write down one line explaining the metaphor. 4. Find a partner. Exchange metaphors. Add one or 2 lines building on each others metaphors (in writing). 5. Pass back and read 6. What did you discover? 7. Now imagine if we had access to all of the metaphors in the room. What kind of richness, diversity and possibility would they suggest? If we grouped them, what would we find? How would that change us?
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/zachstern/87431231/ Reciprocal apprenticeship -http://www.connected.org/learn/levy.html Pierre Levy “ Les arbres de connaissances" (Trees of Knowledge) http://bgblogging.com/2010/02/23/so-this-is-what-its-like-sort-of/
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/27387655@N05/4121432116/ By arcx1972 No real name given This photo was taken
- What Im going to share comes from the learning I experienced working with Etienne and John as well as through my own work. As we dug into the PRACTICES of technology stewardship, we realized they were part of a system, a habitat in which a group, community or network interacted. That there were intersections between the defined set of tools in a group and those used by individuals. There were overlaps and disconnects.
- The proliferation of internet based tools has expanded what it means to "be together" with others for learning, work and pleasure. We'll explore how we might navigate these spaces and play with a few heuristics you can take back with you.
- How do we, as learners, business people, educators and designers decide when to focus on the individual, the group or the wider network? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each? How does our choice inform our selection of tools and methods? And what about all the gray area "in between" each of these?
- It starts with “me” - each of us as individual actors and learners in the world. How do we learn or work? What motivates us? And when are we best served as independent actors? This is also one of the spaces for “legitimate peripheral participation”
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/swissrolli/2167756791/ Uploaded on January 5, 2008 by swissrolli
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/27126314@N03/2956992219/ The next stage along the continuum – and I stress that this is a continuum – is the “we” - bounded groups with an explicit shared purpose. As we move from me to we, the purpose may be emergent, fuzzy and we may just be creating the boundaries of the group.
- So let's do a little comparing and contrasting of this circular continuum. You can be clear when we talk about the individual, me. We can be clear when we have bounded communities with clear establishment of in/out membership. We can also have communities with fuzzy boundaries, which may even be networks. If there was a subliminal sign flashing across this slide, it would be saying “IDENTITY.” identity shows up differently across this continuum and identity can be linked to purpose and boundaries. http://www.zengestrom.com/blog/2005/04/why_some_social.html (Social-material networks)
- These different boundaries influence the power dynamics that occur between people. It influences processes of leadership and other roles. It defines levels of trust and privacy – which are not always closely linked as we move to the network level. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/bonnie_bassler_on_how_bacteria_communicate.html
- Finally, the tools we use can vary across the continuum. We'll talk a bit more about this later.
- The second framework is discussed at length in the book, but I wanted to share it, however briefly, with you. I apologize in advance that I’m going to fly through it pretty quickly…
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/angerboy/201582453/ The elements of time and space present a challenge for communities. Forming a community requires more than one transient conversation or having the same job title in completely different settings. The kind of learning that communities of practice strive for requires a sustained process of mutual engagement, and if mutual engagement is the key to learning, separation in time and space can make community difficult. How can a community sustain an experience of togetherness across the boundaries of time and space? How can members experience togetherness through shared activities if they cannot be together face-to-face? How can the togetherness of a few members (a small meeting, a conversation) become an experience the whole community shares?
- Technology creates “community time” that defies schedules and time zones, and “communal spaces” that do not depend on physical location. One obvious appeal of technology is its variety of solutions for dealing with time and space to achieve continuity and togetherness: to hold a meeting at a distance, to converse across time zones, to make a recording of a teleconference available, to include people who cannot be physically present, to send a request or a file, or to be up-to-date on an interesting project. In a community version of “time shifting” and even “space shifting,” togetherness happens in a variety of formats that enable participation “anytime, anywhere.”
- Members of a community of practice need to interact with each other as well as produce and share artifacts such as documents, tools, and links to resources. Sharing artifacts without interacting can inhibit the ability to negotiate the meaning of what is being shared. Interacting without producing artifacts can limit the extent and impact of learning. Indeed, the theory of communities of practice views learning together as involving the interplay of two fundamental processes of meaning making: Members engage directly in activities, interactions, conversations, reflections, and other forms of personal participation in the learning of the community; members produce physical and conceptual artifacts—words, tools, concepts, methods, stories, documents, and other forms of reification —that reflect their shared experience and around which they organize their participation. (Literally, reification means “making into an object.”) Meaningful learning in a community requires both processes to be present. Sometimes one may dominate the other. They may not always be complementary to each other. The challenge of this polarity is how successfully communities cycle between the two.
- Examples of publishing and interacting (or participation and reification.)
- Technology provides so many new ways to interact and publish while supporting the interplay of participation and reification that it can profoundly change the experience of learning together. Technology enables new kinds of interactions, activities, and access to other people. It also provides new ways to produce, share, and organize the results of being together – through documents, media files, and other artifacts. Most important, it affords new ways to combine participation and reification. For instance, by providing a web-based whiteboard for a conversation, we are supporting new forms of co-authorship where we casually mix words, images and sounds with each other . Technology also pushes the boundaries of both interacting and publishing for a community. It makes it easier for the work of a community to be opened up to the larger world. It can allow a community to decide whether to publish artifacts and invite comments publicly or to hold them within the private boundaries of the community.
- Individuals and groups. Togetherness is a property of communities but individual members experience it in their own ways. Technology provides new opportunities for togetherness, but togetherness can lead to disagreement and the discovery that people see the world (including technology) very differently. Members use the technology individually, on their own. One role of technology is to help manage the complexities of community life and individual participation. Technology can make the community visible in new ways through directories, maps of member locations, participation statistics, and graphic representations of the health of the community. It can provide tools for individuals to filter information to fit their needs, to locate others, to find connections, to know when and where important activities are taking place, and to gather the news feeds from their various communities in one place. In fact, multi-membership is becoming so prevalent that tools to manage the group/individual polarity are becoming an increasingly central contribution of technology.
- A crucial point about learning within communities of practice is that being together does not imply, require, or produce homogeneity. Togetherness is a complex state that weaves communal and individual engagement, aspirations, and identities. Some social trends contribute to the tension inherent in this polarity: Increasingly, individuals are not members of only one community; they are participants in a substantial number of communities, teams, and networks—active in some, less so in others. Communities cannot expect to have the full attention of their members nor can they assume that all their members have the same levels of commitment and activity, the same learning aspirations, and therefore the same needs. Conversely, members must deal with the increasing volume and complexity of their “multi-membership” in different communities. They have to find meaningful participation in all these relationships while preserving a sense of their own identity across contexts.
- Sliders – as we think about how we pick, design and deploy technology, what sort of intentionality do we want with respect to these tensions? More importantly, how do we use them as ways to track our community’s health, make adjustments in both technology and practice.
- So in the past, I’ve done this exercise in pairs, in World Café and in the 1-2-4 build up. I’d not do 1-2-4 here and Café takes longer, so I suggest pairs or maybe rotating pairs then a debrief.
- These roles and practices create the conditions that enable people to….
- Three roles that I’ve been looking at are community leaders, network weavers and technology stewards. Community leaders are a more familiar role, helping defined groups achieve specific goals over a period of time. “Helping” may mean creating conditions, supporting the emergence of relationships or individual and/or group identity, managing, etc. Network weavers are a new role (See the work of June Holley et al at http://www.networkweaving.com/blog/) – “people who facilitate new connections and increase the quality of those connections.” In between community leaders and network weavers are technology stewards – they show up both in groups/communities AND networks.
- Three roles that I’ve been looking at are community leaders, network weavers and technology stewards. Community leaders are a more familiar role, helping defined groups achieve specific goals over a period of time. “Helping” may mean creating conditions, supporting the emergence of relationships or individual and/or group identity, managing, etc. Network weavers are a new role (See the work of June Holley et al at http://www.networkweaving.com/blog/) – “people who facilitate new connections and increase the quality of those connections.” In between community leaders and network weavers are technology stewards – they show up both in groups/communities AND networks.
- Three roles that I’ve been looking at are community leaders, network weavers and technology stewards. Community leaders are a more familiar role, helping defined groups achieve specific goals over a period of time. “Helping” may mean creating conditions, supporting the emergence of relationships or individual and/or group identity, managing, etc. Network weavers are a new role (See the work of June Holley et al at http://www.networkweaving.com/blog/) – “people who facilitate new connections and increase the quality of those connections.” In between community leaders and network weavers are technology stewards – they show up both in groups/communities AND networks.
- Thank you! http://www.flickr.com/photos/photogg19/4586557339/ By photogg19 Paul Martin