who are we and how did we support this work? making visible developing process of design,...
TRANSCRIPT
Who are we and how did we support this work? Making Visible Developing Process of Design, Instruction and Student Learning
Our Embedded Interactional Ethnography Team Center for Literacy & Inquiry in Networking Communities at UC, Santa Barbara
Monaliza Chian
Judith Green
Ethny Stewart
Daisy Dai
Engaging in ongoing interactional ethnographic research with our CSU East Bay LTFT Colleagues, who wanted to make visible the layers of work as it was developing
PI Stephanie Couch
Instructor and Designer, Lonny Avi Brooks
Consultant, Andrea Saveri
Project Director (initial) Azure J Stewart
Beth Yeager, Senior Researcher,
Guiding Questions Guiding Interactional Ethnographic Research With LTFT Team
How, and in what ways, did this grounded and recursive approach support Dr.
Brooks with Andrea Saveri in engaging students in developing understandings
of both organizational communication theories, and in long term and futures
thinking processes and practices in relationship to societal collapse and
organizational development?
What time frames, instructional experiences and resources were needed for
students to achieve a mastery level of both Communication theory and
practice and long term and futures thinking processes?
What constructs were central to locating evidence of student learning of both
organizational theory and long term and futures thinking?
What We Explored: Uncovering the Layers of Work of the Instructor and Design Team
Ongoing dialogues with the instructor, PI, Andrea Saveri and the project team Archived laid a foundation for analysis of the multiple layers of work undertaken to to uncover (make transparent):
• Historical, institutional and social contexts framing the instructional process
• Team members and their roles, relationships and contributions
• The resources developed to introduce students to key constructs (e.g., pace layers, forecasting, societal collapse, cone of uncertainty, among others).
• The cycles of design and development necessary to construct the Spring 2014 course
• How the learning objectives of the course were designed to meet the Institutional Learning Outcomes for Education (ILOS) of the CSU East Bay Curriculum.
What we learned from our research: Creating a (re)presentation of the
complex work of the LTFT teamInteractively Researching an Iterative
Recursive, and Dialogic Ongoing Process
Unknown context
Exploring Organiza
tional Theory
Using organiza
tion theory co
nceptsUnknown co
ntext:
Deep Past -Deep Future
Analyzing, in
terpreting, and using a co
ncept
Axes of DevelopmentInter-relating LTFT ways of thinking with Organizational Theory ways of thinking
in and across Particular Courses
LTFT Pilot Instructor & Design Team
CSUEB Organizational Communication Students
Adapted from conceptual work of Dr. Melinda Kalainoff, Academy Professor, US Miltary Academy: West Point
What counts as mastery and how is it achieved across courses, time and conceptual development -- Communication BA requirements
From Design to Action in and Across Courses
Sp 2014 Best
Course to date
Courses(3
) Fallv 2012
Winter 2013
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Winter
2014
Elements of the Design-Spring 2014
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 7
Week 8 Week 9
Week 10
Finals Week
Flows of Conduct
View image of pace layers and video clip of Brand explaining the meaning of the layer Reading and Simulating the Creative Fire (Ruby’s Song): role playing exercises based on the novel in most class sessions Group color selection
Read 2 Chapters of Diamond’s Collapse
Continue discussions of Creative Fire and what would each color team would want to preserve from their society (from the perspective of their color) to survive across millennia. Examine how the Long Now Foundation as an organization is dedicated to cultivating deep time thinking
Begin Sharing Presentation based on the Final Paper
Norse Society structure vs. Inuit as a case study
Role-play exercises will be done in most classes
Weekly Focus with Extended Interactional Space Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10
Date 4/3/14 4/10/14 4/17/14
4/24/14 5/1/14 5/8/14 5/15/14 5/22/14 5/29/14 6/5/14
Topic Reframing Organizatio
ns & Societies
Getting organized
Groups and
Teams
People and Organizations
Investing in Human Resources
Inter personal
and Group
Dynamics
Power, Conflict
and Coalition
Manager as
Politician
Political Arenas, Political Agents
Organizations as Cultures and Theater
Discussion Board 1 Due Date: April 16, 2014-
11:59
Journal Entries Due Date
April 30, 2014
Discussion Board 2 Due Date: May 7, 2014-
11:59
Discussion Board 3 Due Date: May 21, 2014
11:59
Mastery-K(4) Lonny Response to K(4) Developing-A(3) Lonny Response to A(3)
The collapse of the Norse was an event that had multiple factors involved, and three pace layers can be applied. To begin the pace layers that I am choosing to apply are nature, culture and infrastructure. When it comes to the infrastructure we see how the Norse (poorly) ran their villages because they were very hostile towards their neighbors and rather than building bridges with the Inuit whom they could've traded supplies and goods with, they brutally murdered them. I think this was detrimental to their demise because them coming in to a land that they were unsure how to utilize due to the different weather than what they were used to in Iceland, they could have asked or worked with the natives to learn of ways to better use the land as opposed to overusing what they had and slowly killing what little they had to work with.
Very well stated! Good work Kristela!Now, how did the Norse organize themselves and their Christian society to respond to internal and external threats? How would one of Mintzberg's structures apply here? How would Theory X or Theory Y apply here? Let me know in the next assignment. How were the Inuit innovative? See pp. 244-250 in Jared Diamond's book Collapse on PDF. See the folder on course materials Discussion Board 2 resources. Go into more detail about Norse and Inuit organizational culture. See my emailed announcement about extra credit on this assignment.
When looking back at the collapse of the Greenland Norse civilization it is hard to pin point a certain pace layer that played the biggest role in the demise of the Norse other than Mother Nature herself. Nature is a very powerful force that can destroy, revive or create life in many ways. Nature can be slow and deliberate or quick and immediate. Two of the five factors listed in Jared Diamond’s book Collapse deal directly with nature. The first of the two factors that Jared Diamond writes about is environmental degradation and the second most influential factor was climate change. These changes were both slow in their maturation but overtime played the biggest role. The role they played was changing the landscape the Norse people lived on and adjusting the amount of resources available to them.
Be more specific. What changed in nature exactly? Which trading partners? What types of fish were taboo? Now I would like you to apply a multiframe approach to this case study and provide more detail and bring in contemporary and future organizational comparisons. See my recent emailed announcement about this. How did the Norse organize themselves and their Christian society to respond to internal and external threats? How would one of Mintzberg's structures apply here? How would Theory X or Theory Y apply here? Let me know in the next assignment How were the Inuit innovative? See pp. 244-250 in Jared Diamond's book Collapse on PDF. See the folder on course materials Discussion Board 2 resources. Go into more detail about Norse and Inuit organizational culture.See my emailed announcement about extra credit present and future organizational comparisons on this assignment.
Inclusions of Key ConceptsFramework Key
ConceptsDiscussion Board 1 Discussion Board 2 Discussion Board 3
Mastery Developing Mastery Developing Mastery Developing
Bolman and Deal
Organizational
Theory
Structural 1 4 4 1
Human Resources 3 3 5 3
Political 1 1 1
Symbolic 1 2
Stewart Brand
Pace Layers
Nature 5 3 2
Culture 5 1 1 4
Governance 4 2 1 4
Infrastructure 3 4 1 1 1
Commerce
Fashion
Jared DaimondFive point Societal Collapse
Hostile neighbors 4 3 1 2
Un-friendly trading partners
1 1
Environmental damage 2 1 2 1
Climate change 2 3 1
Society’s response to environmental change
3 2 2 2 5 2
Contrastive Analysis of Two Communication BA Students
Mastery Developing Mastery
•Provides adequate evidence via APA citation
•Shows a sufficient grasp of the concepts•Demonstrates some knowledge of LTFT concepts, some aspects of pace layers and/or other ideas require more explanation.
•Demonstrates some knowledge of core course content based on the main organizational communication text for the course
•Grammar and spelling errors are minimal but enough that at times disrupts the flow of the essay
•Provides detailed evidence via APA citation•Shows a good grasp of the concepts•Demonstrates knowledge of LTFT concepts, pace layers and/or other ideas defined and explained
•Demonstrates knowledge of core course content based on the main org comm text for the course
•Grammar and spelling errors are minimal
Preparing a Collective Mind-for-Action
Engaging informed others in formulating, examining and reformulating potential designs and actions
Thinking iteratively and recursively in the moment AND being forward looking
Going Public with students and with advisory and ethnographic partners
Instructor and design team partner(s) reformulating opportunities for developing particular concepts of Organization Communication Theory in relation to LTFT
Using a co
ncept
(known context)
Analyzing, in
terpreting,
and using a co
ncept
(unknown context)
Awareness of concept
Leading a Learning Model As an Embedded Ethnographer Creating an Iterative, Recursive and Forward Looking Process to Support a “New” Learning Initiative
Axes of D
evelopment
Constructed with the assistance of Dr. Stephanie Couch, Executive Director Institute for STEM Education, CSU East Bay
In a “start-up” the ability to collect data, explore/analyze with others, reformulate and support new directions is fundamental
Ongoing collecting of empirical records on what was happening