Raleigh Convention Center
This 3 hour workshop proposes to work with participants in a real gallery setting (if possible*) to view works of Art from the perspective of how we learn. The workshop will draw on Project Zero approaches to arts education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and its focus on Project Muse (Museums United with Schools in Education) and on Entry Points to Learning (Gardner 1999) derived from Gardner's Multiple Intelligences theory and its integration with a pedagogy for undertanding (TfU). The session will also harness the experience of the facilitators in leading such workshops in Galleries in Ireland, mainland Europe and in the USA at previous ISSoTl conferences (Hamilton , 2012 and Milwaukee, 2011). The significance of the topic lies in its SoTL potential: the 'looking' in this context is intentional, investigative and reflective and is used to identify and chart the nature of an authentic learning experience in real time. Last year we explored the gallery as a liminal space. This year we focus on the gallery, on looking at art, as begetting a potential critical transition where learning occurs for the teacher as learner which, in turn, should make all the difference in designing future learning experiences to maximise student engagement and understanding.
The workshop will begin with a theoretical introduction to the Project MUSE and the idea of making teaching and learning visible . Participants will then be introduced to a variety of questions that interrogate a given work of art from various perspectives. The workshop will then invite participants to view a work of art from the perspective of a variety of Entry Points and perspectives, in a real gallery context. Participants will work in groups to select a work of art to view and critique, this will take at least 15 minutes. Each group will then look at the selected work for at least 30 minutes in a collaborative context.
Participants will then be invited to reflect on this process as a learning experience. It is hoped that transitional moments will be foregrounded in this experience: People learn in different ways, hence to some in the group it will be strange to view a painting from this perspective. Since people bring different perspectives, intelligence strengths and disciplinaary backgrounds to the work of art, there will be a multiplicity of interpretations and perspectives emerging. What do we learn from such diversity? How do we learn to work together as a group, learning to listen, to negotiate and to compromise? What does the experience tell us about how our students learn and how can we use this experience to make a difference to their learning in the future? How can we make the most of this reflective 'looking'in SoTL terms? If we are to shift from focusing on students as subjects/objects to students as partners in the learning, then it is important to re-create an authentic learning environment and scenario so that we can map out those critical transitions in teaching and learning which make all the difference to student engagement and expression.
*It is intended to use a real gallery setting and to travel on the Raleigh bus to this setting. However, digital reproductions will be presented for exploration in the conference setting, if necessary.
Bibliography informorming the literature and methodologies of the workshop:
Significance: How often do we assign group projects in our classes only to be disappointed when we receive results that seem pieced together at the last minute? How often in our own research does it seem like our collaborators leave work until the last minute or aren’t engaged with the process? As professional writing and rhetoric scholar Rebecca Burnett recently said, “Collaboration is NOT intuitive,” yet we often assume that our students, and even our own research teams, know how to do it effectively. But trust issues, overscheduling, and lack of reliable project management strategies often impede successful collaboration for students as well as faculty.
How can we model good collaboration for our students in our own research? How can we implicitly organize our courses to introduce authentic collaboration experiences for our students? How can we actively teach students effective collaboration and project management strategies, even when those skill sets are not the primary content of the course? How can we frame SoTL research projects that both exemplify and study collaboration and project management issues that impact both research teams and student groups?
In this workshop, participants will learn simple and effective time and project management strategies borrowed from the web software development world that can be used in teaching and SoTL research projects to increase engagement, accountability, and commitment. These “agile” strategies empower teams to self-organize all project activities, articulate and visualize discrete project tasks, chunk tasks into short goal-oriented time-boxes, and consistently plan and reflect on progress as a team. Participants will learn how to use the Scrum framework to enable students to take ownership of their own learning in the classroom and to support continuous, iterative progress on large-scale research or service projects. For smaller or shorter-term projects, participants will learn how to implement the Kanban system of using a simple whiteboard and sticky notes to visualize work and limit work in progress to encourage productivity. These strategies can also be used by SoTL researchers to study collaboration and project management across disciplines as well as improve the ways we manage our own research collaborations.
Facilitator Experience: I have been using Agile practices in my own classes for five years and have attended professional Scrum training and professional development workshops over the last three years. To the best of my knowledge, I am the only researcher currently publishing on how Agile practices can improve student collaboration and project management learning outside of the computing sciences and how these practices can also be used in faculty development and SoTL work. I have published three pieces on the subject in peer reviewed journals and have another under review in addition to an in-process faculty development book proposal.
By the end of the workshop, participants should be able to
Interaction Plans: One of the key guidelines for Agile practices is to make the work visible. To play with this concept in the workshop, I will guide the participants in two visualization activities. First we will work together to plan a class using specific concepts from Agile frameworks such as sprints, backlog grooming, retrospectives, etc. Once we have planned the course we will walk through a typical semester while I throw wrenches into the works to show the participants how to respond with agility to unexpected changes (and, therefore, be able to model this ability for students). In the second activity, we will jointly plan a collaborative research project for ourselves using the Kanban system to articulate and visualize all our research activities, assign preliminary activities, and plan for the unexpected. The only supplies I need for these activities are a large wall space or whiteboard, large sticky notes, and Sharpies. After each activity, we will discuss the potential benefits and challenges of the strategies for teaching and SoTL research.
Workshop Foundations: As noted above, I have been using Agile strategies to successfully organize my project-based classes, research, and service projects for over five years. Below is a list of my publications, relevant Agile resources, and articles about collaboration which form the basis for my workshop approach.
The ultimate purpose of SOTL is to increase significant learning. For this to happen faculty must change their teaching to better correspond with SOTL results. This is probably the most crucial transition toward more effective teaching and learning. But, rather than being persuaded by compelling evidence many faculty resist making major changes (Biggs and Tang 2007, Bok 2007, see Hake 2013 for a review).How can we modify our interactions and our presentations to more intentionally help faculty transcend the cognitive and affective factors that keep them from trying more effective, research-based approaches? Briefly: How can we get well-established results from SOTL used more widely? This is a key missing piece in our collective practice of SOTL.
To this end, we will construct and prioritize lists of reasons that faculty give for not changing and of any additional unstated reasons that we infer and then examine alternative approaches for disarming the resistance. Relevant frameworks include Conceptual Change Theory, Gestalt Switching, Dysfunctional Illusions of Rigor, Fostering Grieving, Learning Theory and Sunk Costs. This will be expanded by our joint knowledge and efforts.FACILITATORS’ RELEVANT EXPERIENCE:
I have given numerous faculty development workshops and many SOTL-based conference keynotes and other presentations and have published 50 SOTL-based papers. My emphasis has been on presenting evidence and on helpful ideas for applying SOTL in the classroom. I gradually realized that evidence and ideas alone are not sufficient to get most faculty to seriously revise their courses. I have gradually recognized some of the ways in which faculty resist evidence and have been exploring ways to counter this resistance. Faculty responses have clearly shown that some were more effectively challenged. Recently, I have become more deeply conscious of what I was doing and more intentional about deploying strategies. In addition to its benefits for other participants, this session will expand, sharpen and critique my ideas.LEARNING GOALS:
By the end of this half-day workshop, participants will have:
By the end of this half-day workshop, participants will have:
Engagement Throughout: Participants repeatedly will write and then compare, add and synthesize both in small group discussion and collectively.1. Opening Activities: List, prioritize and discuss reasons faculty give for not changing.
2. Frameworks and Applications for Fostering Change: Still in discussion mode, explore possible ways of dealing with major issues. I will provide written summaries with citations for at least six helpful frameworks (above) and can explain these and their applicability as seems appropriate (mostly as brief comments). Four examples: