OU blog

Personal Blogs

Thoughts provoked by Glasser 2007

Visible to anyone in the world

good reminder about the importance of design for what happens in the future p36. how we design the alumni program will influence if not determine what happens.

"It calls for educational processes and systems that nurture active citizens and open minds by encouraging wonder, creativity, tolerance, cooperation, and collaboration... It promotes vigorous self-criticism, combats rigidity and apathy, and fosters anticipatory decision-making and adaptive learning... such societies prepare their individuals, organizations and institutions to counteract maladaptive forces and respond to unforeseen challenges and changes that are beyond their control with hope, joy, imagination and unruffledness"p36-37

individual learning and social learning co-dynamic p39

Change can be catalyzed by a crisis or surprise (adaptation p47), or it can be planned and directed (p46). Glasser (and AWARD) are interested in planned change. Planned change and learning seen as inseparable. Actually probably unplanned change results in learning too.

"Any planned directed change by individuals or collectives is built on learning" (p46). I agree. But i wonder what other explanations might be offered apart from 'learning'. To me it is so self evident that I cannot even contemplate another way. FOLLOW UP.

Note that Glasser does not "necessarily believe that learning must necessarily engender behavioural change" This is because:

  1. not all learning warrants behaviour change
  2. sometimes the environment -interests, goals, objectives - militate against change.

"it is only through learning that we acquire our values, attitudes, and concerns along with our conception of reality." p47

p47 Glasser gives five interpretations of social learning. i think Blackmore in her book also gives a list of interpretations. Or maybe it was Ison talking about SLIM. FOLLOW UP

i love having all these interpretations so i can cherry pick the ones i like best at this moment...

"[it] reflects the idea that hte shared learning of interdependent stakeholders is a key mechanism for arriving at more desirable futures. [...]A consistent characteristic of the various approaches is that they advocate an interactive (or participatory) style of problem solviing, whereby outside intervention takes the form of facilitation" (Leeuwis and Pyburn 2002 - FOLLOW UP?) p47

Parson and Clark (1995) talking about the same suggest "the deepest difference is that for some, social learning means learning by individuals that takes place in social settings and/or is socially conditioned; for others it means learning by social aggregates." p48

i think a CoP view of learning sees both as interdependent like Giddens' structure and agency. you need both levels of learning/change.

Regarding change in our fellows, it is interesting what Glasser says about Bandura's social learning theory (1977).

  • Attention: a model behaviour in the environment must grab or capture a potential learner's notice. so this is partly the role modeling, partly the dreaming about one's self and where you want to be
  • Retention: remember the observed behaviour
  • Reproduction: replicate the observed behaviour. This is the skills development in leadership and science supported by mentoring
  • Motivation: the environment must offer a consequence that increases the probability for a learner to demonstrate what she has learned. So these are the institutional settings, but also the Senge 'success breeds success' virtuous circle.

This makes me think how many of the fellows feel the need for an alumni program in order to keep being inspired. I guess you can't have a promotion every day so you can motivate yourself by the 'Attention' part of the model.

p50 Glasser talking of ecocultural sustainability, exemplifies Bandura, which gives an idea of entry points

"Ecoculturally sustainable behaviours are commonly seen as less appealing, so they fail to grab our attention. They are frequently unfamiliar so they are less likely to be retained. They are also often more involved and more compled so they are less likely to be reproduced. Finally they are seen as inconvenient, time.consuming, uncool so there is little motivation to try them out"

Active social learning is change. Glasser breaks it into three categories (p51):

  • hierarchical - predetermined inflexible relationships between teacher and taught
  • non-hierarchical - two way learning between experts in their own right
  • co-learning - based on the above, collaboration, trust, full participation and shared exploration

he claims that 1 and 2 are great for expanding existing knowledge, but 3 also "supports the generation of new knowledge and novel strategies for addressing real-world problems"

"Co-learning supports change, positive change in particular"

so that is the shape we should aim for in the alumni group - co-learning. This is why i have felt a resistance to traditional alumni programs which are vertical built. Yes, they are about sharing information and expertise, but this is a key difference - the creation of new knowledge, which for me is new ways of being and doing and this calls out for co-learning. IMPORTANT

"I posit that the most successful forms of active social learning will result from non-coercive relationships that rest on building a common language, transparency, tolerance, mutual trust, collaboration, shared interests and concern for the common good" (pp52-53)

p55 is the definition I used of social learning in the last assignment: [attempts] to funnel uncoordinated and inharmonious individual actions into collective actions that support explicit goals". Though in the light of what i was thinking above about the new knowledge this is probably a bit of a lite definition.


Permalink Add your comment
Share post

social learning - three levels of change

Visible to anyone in the world

Earlier i was saying that my fellows seemed to be at different readinesses for change: individual change, social change, and societal change - the first two being change within the system, the third change on the system.

I have been hunting around for someone else's thoughts on this. Kitchener is not quite right and i haven't looked up yet the Hyatt and Kaplan Bridget referred to.

Maybe i should add in parantheses that the thoughts in the most recent posts should make it clear that i find social learning and change inseparable - if there is no change then no learning has happened no matter how much teaching or facilitating or knowledge creation has been going on. Aha - So that is why i can use a change framework to describe social learning. I have a great framework regarding levels of change - from EvaLEAD, Grove, Kibel and Haas - individual, social and generative. But i was looking for a three level framework for learning - as something different. Actually maybe this is perfectly adequate then since learning and change are so closely entwined?

 

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

Social Learning - critical and action-oriented

Visible to anyone in the world

(Still in the introduction, Wals is summarising the chapters)

This is from his summary of chapter 3:

[social learning] ... is an essentially contestable concept that is claiming, normatively, to offer desirable directions for action, and at the same time demanding practical change. Therefore it must be elaborated in an action-oriented way, reflecting a contextual balance between what is deemed desirable and what may be made feasible.

I think it is important to recognise that social learning and particularly societal learning:

  • is normative
  • is action-oriented

This means that it involves change, and change always means winners and losers, however relative. And so social learning is always critical, whether or not the term is explicitly used. It also opens up questions of ethics and power. Yes the power is coming from below generally and is horizontal not vertical, but it is still power, and with power comes responsibility.

His summary of chapter 4 highlights some interesting relevant questions:

  • If sustainable development is contestable, can and should learning lead to agreement?
  • If learning for SD is to contribute to action for sustainable development, then how can the relationship between thinking and doing be conceived? and that is back to the last posts on action competence maybe..?
  • If reflexivity is involded in action for SD, then learning must include fundamental values, worldviews and identity. How can that be achieved? i think this is refering to the critical and responsible point i was making above.
Permalink Add your comment
Share post

Social Learning - introduction part 2 - action competence

Visible to anyone in the world

So in my last post i started thinking about thinking and action. Now, it is pretty clear to me that you can't deliberately perform an action without thinking it first. There is something here about reflection in use i think . that on-your-feet learning that happens as we navigate and problem solve our way through life.

Wals claims that facilitated social learning can bring about knowledge, values and action competence. (p19)

Action competence. What a great concept. Maybe that is the bridge i needed between reflection/learning and action. You don't necessarily have to act, but you have the readiness to act. And this is something that i noted in my research respondents - they all seem at different points in a personal trajectory of readinesses, which i can now call 'action competence'

He also claims that learning goals are at least in part internally determined by the community of learners itself, and that is important here when we think about an alumni group, as usually everything is determined by the mother programme.

 

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

social learning notes

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Arwen Bailey, Monday, 19 Mar 2012, 05:19

 

now i am pulling it all together and trying to find other people's research that supports the kind of picture i have in my mind of how my research fits in with the world.

The research was the coming together of a practical need to explore a nascent fellowship alumni community and my own interest in social learning for change, or societal learning as Irene Guijt prefers to call it and i agree.

So i have been reading around the subject - particularly the book Social Learning: Towards a sustainable world - but have not had time to write my thoughts up and link them explicitly to AWARD. And if i don't type my thoughts only develop 80%!

Note that it is of course talking about sustainability in an environmental sense and I am talking about sustainability in a project outcome sense. But there is a lot about the concept of sustaining and the role of learning in that can be shared.

Introduction

Wals and van der Leij explore the meaning of sustainability and of social learning. They say (p18) that it takes place at the level of individuals, groups and networks. It would be interesting to use that to expand the neat matrix from De Laat and Simon (2002):

2196117e88baafd945f21405b28f6a43.JPG

Especially if you add in a dose of this next definition: social learning is "the collective action and reflection that occurs among different individuals and groups as they work to improve the management of human and environmental interrelations" (Keen et al. 2005). Obviously in my situation it would be improving something else but what intrigues me is the collective action part. Glasser (chapter 2) does not see action as necessarily in there. And this has been a source of discussion on the STiP forum.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

not career trajectories but learning

Visible to anyone in the world

Now i know the transcripts better, it occured to me, the difference between the fellows' purposes is not so much where they are in their career but where they are in a learning process. It is important to say that this learning path will be different for everyone and will have different destinations, but roughly it boils down to three types of learning (now is this Kitchener? If any passer by can help me with a reference i would be grateful)

  • individual. The fellow is interested in improving her skills and career prospects, networking, becoming more visible and being more productive (individual learning in group setting)
  • social. The fellow is interested in collaborating with others on project proposals, sharing the AWARD Skills and message forward to others, sensitizing men, helping girls in schools, but WITHIN the existing paradigm (group learning in group setting)
  • societal. The fellow is interested in changing the context, the environment within which she is working. She wants to set agendas and influence policy with an eye firmly on alleviating poverty and changing the role of African women in agriculture. Game-changing change.
Permalink 2 comments (latest comment by Arwen Bailey, Sunday, 18 Mar 2012, 09:35)
Share post

emerging themes

Visible to anyone in the world

going through the interviews i can see different needs and readinesses of the fellows. Reasons for wanting an alumni scheme seem to depend on the fellows' progress on their personal trajectory:

  • skills acquisition, motivation, access to expertise
  • desire to share forward, multiply what they have experienced, sharing forward leadership training, writing training and mentoring younger fellows in instituttions , sensitiszing men, reaching out to girls in schools
  • desire to engage with external environment, set agendas, influence policy, lead relevant research

Frameworks to help understand this or locate individuals are:

Mayoux four powers framework that we use in AWARD

  • power from within (confidence, motivation, networking for inspiration)
  • power to do (skills acquistion, networking for personal career development)
  • power over (resource generation, networking for visibility)
  • power with (setting agendas, influencing policy, networking for concerted action)

What i feel doesn't fit exactly and maybe this extends that framework a bit, is the desire many of them have to act as a multiplier of the AWARD effect. Maybe the empowerment framework is seen principally as a personal thing and doesn't cater for this kind of altruistic power to in the sense of giving it to... What other preposition could we use to render this idea?

Power from? Power through? Power beyond? Power across?

Waddell typology of networks

societal learning. Networks can be seen as a typology of increasing societal impact where the last is generative network in which the network is outward looking and aims to create societal change.

Appreciative systems

Using the term 'readinesses' made me think of Vicker's appreciative systems.  I wonder if there is anything there which could be helpful in this analysis. TIme to go back and reread.

Kitchener's three levels of cognition

AWARD helps the fellows solve problems better, then they get meta prepared, reflexive, self aware to step out of their scientific cloud and see the bigger purpose (as Sheila Ommeh said). A third level can be seen as trying rather than being good at adapting to the envrionment, as trying to shape the environment.

Of course the framework i haven't mentioned is the actual CoP framework that guided my research. I hope that is not going to matter....

Permalink 1 comment (latest comment by Arwen Bailey, Sunday, 26 Feb 2012, 05:42)
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 92989