Discover, Dream, and Design

creative commons licensed (BY-NC-ND) flickr photo by ChimpLearnGood: http://flickr.com/photos/alphachimpstudio/3806097249

Sunday afternoon I saw the title of this post. The connected educator movement is failing and we're all to blame. That caught my attention-- alot. And I did something I rarely do, I jumped into the comments mainly because the judgment for failure is based on metrics from Twitter and I've strong feelings about....

Very honestly -- I don't know Daniel, the author, and I don't think I've ever been an "edtech" person (whatever that is). Even as a "resource teacher" in the instructional technology office of a very large urban district, I was the one with a Masters degree in curriculum; I was the least "tech" person in the office.  How did I get the job?-- I recognized the power and potential of technology for learning and connecting- opening new windows onto a world for so many. And in all the professional development I have designed and facilitated --learning, collaboration and connecting was the focus. So I guess that was the reason I jumped in, and perhaps not very cogently, as the contents of that post touched the core of my passion.

Here's my comment:

I guess I'm surprised that a focus on Twitter is the metric for determining the failure of educators connecting. What about educators connected through online communities of practice, those connected through the ongoing K12Online conference, and those connected through Connected Educator month, not to mention those connected in ongoing projects with colleagues and classrooms around the world? 

From one who sees connecting as all about connecting with people (see the intro quote in chapter one about human networks in The Connected Educator: Learning and Leading in the Digital Age), connecting with context made possible through the affordances of technology-- the possibilities for systemic change we'd like to see happens when we can engage in deep, meaningful and messy collegial conversations. In my humble opinion, a prerequisite for that to happen is a relationship built on trust. Although growing and nurturing trust occurs on Twitter, I think more than 140 characters are needed to immerse in the kinds of discussions that deepen relationships that in turn enable those conversations necessary for change. 

I'm likely one of those you've mentioned who you see as positive to a fault. The angst I feel about certain named "reform" efforts hurts my soul yet I know that our words create our reality and we grow towards that on which we focus and so I'll continue to maintain that positive focus. I'm old; I've been blessed to see and experience the power of connectedness made possible only by the affordances of technology. And I've a deep belief in the importance of relationships in teaching and learning (Barth). Without them (face to face and in online spaces) and without context, how can we even think of engaging in conversations with others?

I'm wondering if an "us" vs "we" mentality contributes to the creation of a wall of resistance? What if all our efforts were about "we". What if our "we" efforts focused on what's working, what's the best of learning in everyone's classroom? And then together, we ask how can "we" grow our collective practice to improve learning for all of our students? And as all voices contribute, we leverage what we've learned from others across the globe into the conversation?

I guess I was hoping that perhaps I was articulating an inclusive approach, an avenue to develop a more collective accomplished connected practice. And I guess I'm advocating for this from a lens not often taken in the "edtech" community, that of appreciative inquiry.

Daniel was generous to reply

Twitter is simply a metric, but I see it as helpful. Tom's insights also are helpful, but again are also just a signal. They obviously don't show the whole picture, but they're a helpful insight. The Twitter numbers are kind of shocking because of the promise that Twitter held for the rest of education in the past few years. Last year it made this Top 100 Tools for education. http://c4lpt.co.uk/top100tools... Clearly, the folks responding to that survey have their own bias. 

Others have reached out to me over the past 24 hours. I have questions like this: "What about all the connections that go on in Schoology and Edmodo: that's "connected education," correct?" 

Sure, there's also places like K12 Online Conference, which is probably a microcosm even compared to the Twitter numbers. We can't judge this by looking through our own glasses, or we get it wrong. Schoology certainly doesn't have a million teachers on it. Looking through Edmodo's communities, they're connecting going on there, but how does that compare to 6.9 million other educators? Microcosms.
We keep looking at things from our own experience, our own schools perspective. What is working for you, is most likely not working for the school down the street. In order to bring the other 6.9 million along, we need to start communicating in a way that empathizes with the non-connected educator. 

If a tech tool can eventually bring a physical connection (or a virtual connection that goes beyond Skype or Hangouts)- that's more powerful. How do we make that happen?

Obviously I did a very poor job of sharing my perspective-- at least that's how it feels to me--

Perhaps I've tunnel vision--- yet there is an incredible amount of research around appreciative inquiry as an effective approach to systemic change.

I just so wish I was better able to articulate it's potential--

Well, Duh!

I surely do have my moments--
Sometimes I am so dense--
And then what I missed jumps up and slaps me in the face-- hard--
It is for those slaps that I am extremely grateful--

The most recent--  thanks to the very wise, very accomplished women educators in the recently finished section of the Connected Coaching eCourse.

As they reflected collaboratively on our 11 weeks together and I listened in our final webinar, it became crystal clear--

I have repeatedly attributed the depth of learning and the collegial relationships evidenced in each section of the eCourse to the very intentional building of trust and relationships that we focus on early in the course.  I wrote about that here and here. Now that I've listened so closely, I realize I developed a lazer focus, neglecting to highlight critical elements that also contribute to what have been extraordinary personal outcomes for all of us who have co constructed knowledge together. Don't get me wrong, there is no way the importance of trust and relationships can be understated. No. Way.

It is that, coupled with process that creates an environment for learning that leads to each member leaving the course with a bittersweet feeling. Bittersweet-- It was like climbing a mountain. Bummed that it is over. I struggled. I am a changed person. It was hard, rigorous. We need to maintain these connections.

I am convinced an appreciative, strength based inquiry approach to learning, one in which co learners are self directed, self governing, leads to the deepest learning and self realization. The approach enables each co learner to explore that which they wonder. It requires deep thinking in that the inquiry is facilitated through questions, those of the lead learner and that of all co learners. The approach creates a "no fail", safe environment for learning in which each learner feels valued.

Add to that the element of a personal learning contract described as challenging, empowering, difficult, freeing, respecting the learner. Woven together, the contract, the appreciative strength based inquiry process and the intentional growing of relationships and trust create a rich tapestry that embraces, immerses, and supports collaborative personal learning that enables the best of knowing and doing.

Well, duh! Of course-- Now that I've heard it from them, it seems pretty obvious to me.  

Wendy, Heidi, Amy, Dawn, Judi, Janne, Pati and Lindy-- thank you! Thank you highlighting what I should have realized so much earlier. And thank you for giving so much of yourselves during our 11 weeks together.

And now I'm wondering what else am I missing? 

Photo Credit

Celebrating a unique collaborative inquiry

Some 2 years minus 4 months ago, I embarked on a unique collaborative inquiry.

The driving question:
How can I restore range of motion and functionality to my left shoulder?

Luckily I've had the opportunity to dig deeper and deeper with an expert learner, Dana Melena, with this content.

And as the expert learner, Dana has brought to our collaboration all the attributes of expertise that Bransford described:

• Expert learners have well-organized knowledge, not just problem-solving strategies.
• Expert knowledge is organized to support understanding, not just recall. And the organization is grounded in a field’s foundational concepts.
• Expert knowledge is conditionalized, and the conditional relationships form patterns that experts recognize and rely upon.
• An expert’s fluency allows the easy retrieval of relevant knowledge. The patterns mentioned in the previous point are second nature to the expert, while the novice struggles to recognize them. This fluency with fundamental patterns frees the mental energy to focus on new knowledge to add to the pattern.
• There is a difference between adaptive experts, whose metacognitive skills allow the transfer of knowledge from one setting to another, and routine experts, whose expertise allows them to function well in standard settings but doesn’t serve them well when conditions are different.

Dana is undeniably an "adaptive expert" as this inquiry has been challenging and this body of mine more than unique.

Throughout this twice weekly collaboration
We've asked questions--
We've listened, really listened to each other--
We've brought in expert opinions--
We've had difficult conversations--
She's valued what is important to me; she's been encouraging, she's been frank and honest.

And reflecting now-- the elements of collaborative inquiry abound.

Developing Collaborative Knowledge - Collaborative inquiry creates intersubjective understanding, including areas of common experience and mutual knowing. Knowledge is co-created by the group and is shared by the group.

Relationship - The potential for collaboration is enhanced by a shared history and careful attention to relationship building. It is characterized by an affirmation of one another's contributions, an absence of internal competition and the nurturing of individual and well as group development.

Dialogue - Dialogue is central to the process of  collaborative inquiry. This includes storytelling, creating metaphors and using other right brained processes, experience sharing and the expression of tentative, not fully-formed ideas.

Attentive Listening - Collaborative inquiry requires careful attention to self and others by listening with the intent to understand, observing nonverbal cues, attending to affective responses, honoring silence, and listening to the spaces between the silences.

Reflection -Engagement in collaborative inquiry requires multiple levels of reflection:individual reflection on process and experience, individual reflection on the written reflection of others, and group reflection through dialogue.

Openness to divergent views - By acknowledging that our own knowledge base may be limited by our socio-cultural background and experiences and becoming open to seeing from another's frame, opportunities to extend knowledge are created.

Shared Passion - When passion is mutual, the motivation for collaboration is high. Excitement and energy generated by one member often ignites passion in others.

Commitment - In order for effective collaboration to occur, members must be committed to themselves, to one another and to the group process and project.

We've created areas of common experience-- she has been the lead learner in this area with expansive expertise; I've brought some knowledge of my history and aspirations for doing.

The relationship element, as always, is huge. Each of us has intentionally engaged in affirmations growing a meaningful and productive relationship that enables visions to become reality.

Our sharing of experiences, the stories -- have contributed to formal and informal dialogues that have deepened and supported my learning.

And we have listened, really; so important to highlight that again-- Dana's a master of observational listening, hearing what's not said and that has been a strength for me also.

Our reflections on what worked, what didn't yielded more questions, more experimentation-- and led to different paths all in the quest of an answer to the driving question.

We've extended our collaborative knowledge -- when presented with a divergent view I was struck by Dana's nimbleness and flexibility and my excitement as she changed directions in mid step within seconds.

Fueled by our passions-- mine for regaining functionality and hers for seeing that occur-- we have sustained a huge momentum throughout this extensive inquiry. Dana's passion has truly "re ignited" mine when the inquiry came up against potholes and some detours.

And lastly commitment, articulated more clearly than I could ever-- we've been committed to ourselves, to one another and to the process.

Adding here one last element-- that of celebration and recognition of a process that is seen as important and significant by those involved. In my mind, these celebrations and affirmations can not only add value to the process but also provide opportunities for those involved to understand more deeply how profoundly the opportunity to inquire collaboratively has altered their lives.

Still inquiring and learning more, Dana, this celebration's for you! Thank you--

Image: 'The Art of Inquiry'
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60533367@N02/5524124901