Archive for the ‘Reflection’ Category

Dramatic realization and identities

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

A new guest post from Jenny Hughes on identities.

“Well here I am again in Bremen, squatting on Graham’s blog. He’s abandoned me on a key board while he has gone out for a pizza and, much as I dislike blogging, I dislike pizza even more – always reminds me of a picture of food on a plate.

This is the second time this week I have swapped identities with Graham. I think. On Thursday evening he was invited to a fashion show and disco. Fortunately for all those of you have seen him dance or noticed his taste in clothes, this all took place in Second Life. So there we were, sitting in a bar, laptop, fags and beer at the ready and Graham hands over the keyboard on the grounds that I’m better at talking rubbish and faster at typing drivel than he is.

Now whose identity am I taking over? And come to think of it, who am I? His 2L ID is Graham Lightfoot (in his dreams), a superhero lookalike who for the occasion was dressed in gimpy black leathers with definite shoulder pads (the embarrassment of it!). So I played at being Jenny Hughes being Graham Attwell being Graham Lightfoot for a while then I thought it would be more fun being my own SL identity being Graham Lightfoot being the first life Graham Attwell who was, at that moment, Jenny Hughes. Keep up. I also have another first life identity (for particular writing purposes) and she has a second life ID as well. And I am a virtual student who I teach and she is someone else in SL. Maybe I should have invited them all along, just to see what dialogue my fingers wrote.

Do I have an identity crisis? Well I guess it depends on which one of me you are asking.

So all this gets us into late-night, beer-fuelled conversations about identities - justified as ‘research’ for a forthcoming project on ‘Identities’. Now my job at Pontydysgu is to generate ideas on demand and turn up occasionally for which I get paid in beer. It’s a good system, 1 idea = 1 beer, or, if pushed, 1000 words = 1 beer. (I’m thinking about having a word with my union rep to see if I can get on to a fixed rate of 1 hour = 1 beer.) My starting point when Graham says I want 2 ideas by tomorrow is always to grope around my brain to see if I can recycle anything still alive in there. I think it’s called re-purposing. Unfortunately my brain is a bit like my handbag – filled with all sorts of junk I carry around just in case it comes in useful. And there, like the toffee in the bottom of my handbag-brain, I unearthed a rather squashed memory about Erving Goffman’s “dramaturgical approach”. It took me a while to get pick the fluff off – it was, after all, 1959 when he wrote his blockbuster “The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life’ and I had read it as a student back in the 60’s.

(Why should novelists have blockbusters and academics have to make do with Seminal Works, I ask??)

One of the things I like about the dramaturgical approach is that it looks at context rather than behaviour. I like the Wikipaedia explanation

“In this sense, dramaturgy is a process which is determined by consensus between individuals. Because of this dependence on consensus to define social situations, the perspective argues that there is no concrete meaning to any interaction that could not be redefined.”

The core of Goffman’s thinking was that a person’s identity is not a stable and independent psychological entity; it is constantly remade as the person interacts with others.

Sweet. And seems to me as good a starting point for looking at identities as any.

Now a great many of you sociologist-types will be very familiar with all his stuff, given that Goffman was one of the most influential sociologists of the 20th century, but for the rest of you and Graham, here are some sound bites.

Goffman had lots of ‘bits’ in his theory, some bits are more applicable to identities issues than others.

He makes heavy use of metaphors and looks at communication and social interaction as if it was a theatrical performance. He argues that there are 7 elements to a performance. So, in no particular order:

The front or ‘the mask’ is a standardized, generalizable and transferable way for the performer to control the manner in which the audience perceives him. I would say this could be an avatar, a login name or whatever. Just go to the chat rooms to look at some of the more off the wall names, especially when you just know that Hunkybeast and Lionking are 5 foot nothing, scrawny little men who wear string vests.

Mystification refers to the concealment of certain information from the audience and why this is done. So Hunkybeast is often a bit economical with the truth about his wife and 5 kids.

Dramatic realization is the selection of aspects of the performer that he wants the audience to know. For instance, when projects, as a matter of course, set up communication platforms on their web sites I remember being outraged that they even suggested I put up a photograph or told people who my friends were. Even now, I tend to select out more aspects of myself than maybe Graham. Though of course it depends on the context and certainly changes with my identities - on Facebook I’m happy to fill in every quiz going to find out and share with the world ‘What sort of Drunk Am I?’.

Idealization. A performance often presents an idealized view of the situation to avoid confusion (misrepresentation) and strengthen other elements. So the way I write this blog is different from the way I write an academic paper, partly because the style reaffirms it is a blog but also suggests that there is actually a human being behind the performance who is ….(I was going to say warm, funny, witty, interesting, gorgeous but Graham said …..) a small grumpy troll.

Maintenance of expressive control is about the extent to which people stay in character. I am truly ace at this. I have complete on-line alter ego who not only has a complete identity but he or she (giving nothing away) also has an identity in SL, makes spelling mistakes and typos I don’t make, uses a different vocabulary and different sentence construction and different abbreviations (yeah, I was a linguist in a previous life. That’s without the detail of their ‘life’.

Finally, the needs to be a level of belief by those playing the part in the parts they are playing. This may be high or low, total or partial, cynical or authentic etc. I sometimes have a sneaky suspicion that Graham believes he really is a broad shouldered super-hero lookalike in first life as well as second.

Please, all you purists, don’t write and tell me that this is not at all what Goffman meant. I am only borrowing some ideas with a view to a bit of ‘re-purposing.’ There are lots more bits I think are useful in Goffman’s ideas but this blog entry is getting way too long and I’m getting hungry.

In particular I’d like to have look at what he said about ‘stages’ – back stage, front stage and off-stage, about ‘roles’ and about ‘secrets’ and how this connects with stuff I am playing with on learning ‘narrative’ (watch this space). At the moment I’m not sure if I can do anything useful with these ideas but I’d love to know whether anyone else sees any potential in them in providing a framework for exploring ‘identities’.

PS I’ve just counted Goffman’s elements and I’ve only talked about 6 because I can’t remember the seventh. Anyone who can fill the blank?”

Reflecting on Reflection

Thursday, August 9th, 2007

I had an interesting exchange of emails this morning with Ben Scoble from Staffordshire University.

Ben had picked up on my list of different skills / competencies for reflection

• Forming an opinion

• Expressing an opinion

• Articulating an opinion

• Justifying an opinion

• Defending an opinion

• Supporting the opinions of others

• Challenging others opinions

• Questioning others opinions

• Seeking clarification of others opinions

• Representing other opinions

• Building on others opinions

• Sorting fact from fiction

Ben says: “Reflection is a particular concern - as it often plays a crucial role in eLearning and developing higher level (deeper) learning - is this an inherent ‘feminine’ skill [or a skill that is easier to hone]?”

He goes on to ask: “So would the lack of knowledge of and/or the inclusion of a framework for engaging in reflection activities - adversely affect male students engaging in eLearning?”

I’m not sure of the answer to this - but suspect that gender does make a difference. But of course it is not just gender. Many individuals do not take easily to reflection (my daughter would be a prime example!). Given the importance of reflection in learning (or at least I think it is) then the inclusion of a framework for reflection would benefit those learners who may be at a disadvantage in this form of learning.

Yesterday I was in Leicester for a training day for the launch of our new e-Portfolio system - Freefolio (lots more about that soon - it is fabulous).

In the morning we ran a hands on session for the e-Portfolio and in the afternoon I ran a workshop on reflection. It was a bit like being hoist with my own petard. For some time I have been berating e-Portfolio ‘experts’ who say how important reflection is in the e-Portfoliod development process - but then have nothing more to say on the subject. I was a little nervous about ‘teaching’ refection. But the workshop was a lot of fun and the participants seemed to enjoy it - and said, at least, they found it useful.

Now I would like to take this forward in tow ways:

a) To develop the framework Ben talks about

b) To develop on line tools / activities to develop competences in reflection.

The only problem is I need some funding - anyone any ideas?

Good and bad teaching - the video

Tuesday, April 24th, 2007

Over the last year I have made a series of short videos as part of the European Commission sponsored ASSIPA course. The videos are based on original footage shot at a face to face course. You can find all of the videos linked through the ASSIPA wiki pages (I will write more about ASSIPA next week.

The first video I edited was of a ‘coins exercise’ - designed to show in a practical way how good and bad teaching impacts on learners. It was great material but took me ages to do - and I still got the aspect ration wrong. Still, I was very attached to this movie. And then one day I logged on to my Google account form a strange computer. Pressed a couple of buttons (in German) and realised I had said I refused to accept Google’s conditions. How does Goggle react - they instantly delete all your videos! Oh well, I thought - I will have to upload the videos again - and that is what I did. Except I couldn’t find a copy of the coins video anywhere. I must have inadvertently culled it in one of my periodic attempts to get rid of old bits of old video.

Well I though about remaking the video but couldn’t quite summons up the heart to do it. And then last week I was talking with Woif Hilzensauer at Salzburg airport and he told me how much he liked the video. Ah - I said - its a shame but I lost it. I’ve got a copy on my iPod he said. And so he had. So I copied it to my computer and it is back up on Google again. So - if you would like to watch the video after such a long intro - just click here.

There’s hope for digital preservation yet.

Describing Learning

Thursday, January 4th, 2007

Happy new year to you all.

I have spent a number of days over Christmas editing videos from the raw film of a workshop we ran in Germany last year as part of the European funded ASSIPA project. The workshop was on self evaluation and was heavily experiential in design.

It’s not easy editing video of real teaching -  there are lots of interruptions and the like, and people coughing and sneezing in the background. On the other hand it is authentic and avoids the dangers of those horribly patronising ‘now I’m going to teach you something’ videos.

I will post a page somewhere giving access ot all the videos an to the learning materials - all of which is available under a Creative Commons License.

The video featured in this blog - “Dimensions of Facilitator Style - is based on the work of John Heron and James Kiltie from the Institute for the Development of Human Potential at University of Guildford, UK in 1970s. they came up with the following way of classifying teaching or facilitator styles:

Directive        ——————————————–    non-directive

(how things are done)

Structured        ——————————————–    unstructured

(what is done)

Cathartic        ——————————————–    non-cathartic

(extent to which facilitator takes emotional responsibility)

Catalytic        ——————————————–    non-catalytic

(extent to which facilitator manipulates the pace + pitch)

Interpretive    ——————————————–    non-interpretive

(extent to which facilitator is responsible for ‘sense making’)

Disclosing     ——————————————–    non-disclosing

(extent to which personal identity and values of facilitator are visible and affect the intervention)

Confronting    ——————————————-   non-confronting

(degree to which illegitimate values, meanings etc are made explicit)

(prescriptive    ——————————————-    descriptive)

(determining range of legitimate meanings)

Now, I think this is pretty cool and in another of the series of videos - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4423062597571110104 - we try using it in practice.

But what really interests me is the potential for describing learning. Because, welcome as the recent interest and focus on informal learning is - the division between formal and informal learning is just too crude and insensitive to help us greatly in understanding learning.  Over Christmas I started  working with Jenny Hughes - who is featured in the videos - on adopting the Dimensions of Facilitator Styles as a tool for  analysing learning. I’m meeting Jenny in Portugal next week and I hope we can find some time to take this work a little further.

I would welcoem anyones thoughts on this - and if you would like to know more about the videos or learning materails just drop me an email.