Search Results for: quip

I’m not the least interested in fishing (traumatic childhood experience :), but my wife and kids are. Both kids have tried, but to no avail. Yesterday, our local community was hosting a festival, however, including a fishing clinic. So we signed the kids up. The clinic was arranged with quite a bit to ensure success.

First, they stocked the ‘lake’ (hardly more than a pond). Second, they conducted a class before going out to the water. Then, they provided scaffolded practice in a protected environment. And they ensured a parent attended as well as the kids.

The class was a little late starting, and rambled a bit, but had a very good approach. The presenter was relaxed, and included some chatter, but basically led the learners through the crucial steps to be ready to fish. He talked about tying on a hook, He used a big prop hook and rope to show the principles of tying the hook onto the line. He also talked about principles of things like weights and bobbers, while showing the basics.  And had the kids answer questions along the way, to force them to think.   There wasn’t divergence into other forms of fishing (e.g. flies), but just a focus on what you need to go. Then they enabled those who didn’t have their own equipment, ensured everyone was ready, and moved out of the room and into the practice environment.

The practice environment was a roped off section of the shoreline, and a net-enclosed section of the lake. There were worms, and cleaning and packing if you caught anything and wanted to keep it. A big deal was made of a big catfish caught earlier in the day. The team of instructors cruised around answering questions and advising if useful.

Our session was in the evening, and things eventually got hot, with two big bass being caught at our end, and something big at the other. Our boy caught a small sunfish (his first fish ever, he was thrilled), and later had a big one that got away. My daughter had one nibble which was lost to an equipment problem. But it couldn’t have been set up much better to optimize the chance to succeed. And we found out it’s stocked year-round, so they can go back and try some more.

It’s a great model to think about for novices who need motivation as well as some key skills. How can you better ensure success and consequent motivation as well as the ability to execute again?

As I look at the larger picture (I’ve been reading Verna Allee’s books on Value Networks; great stuff), I’ve been thinking about the type of organizations we need. One of the rubrics is that it’s no longer about ‘know-how’, but about ‘know who’, since what we need to know how to do is no longer static. We need to be able to do new things and we need to ‘know-who’ can help us. Which is all true, but even if you know what you need to do, you may not be as well-equipped to perform as if we include another factor.

I first heard David Batstone talk about his book Saving The Corporate Soul at an eLearning Forum meeting in downtown San Francisco. I’ve become a subscriber to his ezine and enjoy his regular columns on ways in which corporations are and can be (or are not) socially responsible, as well as the other work he points to.

In his most recent edition, he points to a piece of work talking about “know why”. The point is that even if workers know what to do, if they don’t know why they’re doing it, they’re not going to perform as well.

This ties into organizational vision and values. In Financial Times (I think, I read it in transit to/from Norway), someone was talking about how business goals are more than platitudes about strategy, but instead you need to know what you’re doing and why it’s the right thing. The CEO has to be about more than cold logic, but have a vision, and an organization has to communicate it’s passion throughout the enterprise. This isn’t core values unless it’s lived (I worked for an organization that talked about three core values, and then reliably violated one in dealing with employees!).

The Cluetrain Manifesto tells us that lack of authenticity will come back to haunt an organization, and I think that, in addition to other factors, unless employees live and breathe the organizational values, the company is doomed. Values-driven performance will trump sheer smart execution (it’s simple Wisdom after all).

Right after my opening keynote at the International Conference on ICT in Teaching and Learning in Hong Kong, David Jonassen presented via a canned video and a live video chat Q&A afterward. David’s presentation on his long term work on problem-solving dove-tailed nicely with mine, as I talked about how to design learning experiences around meaningful decisions, and he talked about different categories of those meaningful decisions. (On a personal note, I was thrilled to hear he was going to use my book in a class of his!)

He started with the claim that we need meaningful education, and that problem-solving was a core skill going forward, a theme I too support. He argued that we also needed to recognize that the types of problems we teach learners to solve in school bear little resemblance to the types of problems our learners face outside of schoo, and that we needed to change the types of problems we introduce learners to. An astute observation!

He made off-hand comments that I suspect not all the audience picked up: the importance of addressing new concepts and problems qualitatively before addressing them quantitatively (contrary to much done in schools), quoting (I *think* it was Gardner) that theories have no meaning until they’re applied, and that our learners were coming to us too spoon-fed with overly simplistic problems and consequently that it was hard to develop richer abilities to flexibly apply schemas (nor, I might add, with mindsets about persistence and willingness to fail).

He also talked about how while he supported problem-based learning,
I’ve taken to given challenging problems as group assignments in my classes when I teach, having them wrestle with some ambuigity as part of developing a decontextualized approach to applying the concepts to the outside world. The problems are simplified to unrealistically focus on particular aspects, but are otherwise framed as Requests For Proposals or grant opportunities that they might really face. They sometimes complain, but I do think at the end of the experience they’re better equipped to solve the problems we want graduates to be able to solve. It’s nice to be able to blame David!

Back when I was building an adaptive learning system that presented content differentially based upon the individual’s characteristics as a learner, I came across the concept of ‘universal learning design’. It sounded like a great idea, but there wasn’t really any useful guidance at that time.

I was recently reminded about it by a talk announcement and went back to the CAST site (Center for Applied Special Technology). There I found more guidance, particularly in the form of a book on the subject.

Their core notion is to have multiple representations of the content (which I already support as an instantiation of Rand Spiro’s Cognitive Flexibility Theory), multiple forms of assessment (which is why I support eportfolios), and multiple forms of affective support. It’s the latter that resonates for me currently, as I’m recognizing that at least some of the power of engaged learning comes from addressing the affective/emotional components of learning.

Their specific thoughts on this are found in this chapter, and there’re some examples to make it concrete.

I am still trying to go further, and incorporate attitude change into the learning process as well, recognizing that equipping the mind isn’t sufficient if the behavior change requires an associated attitude change. Also deciding when you need major change and when it’s just the right ‘nudge’ that’s necessary. However, those are topics for other posts I reckon.

There’s also the