Nicholas Bowskill

Bronwyn, Could you say a bit more about what a universal design is? As a first impression, it sounded to me as the last thing you would want if you wish to accommodate difference.

My universal design would be one that seeks to create a hybrid culture of situated collaboration. It wouldn't seek to privilege any culture over another but rather to create a new culture of respect for all involved in the activity and the goal of mutual understanding. So what does your universal design mean?

I also think that we need to be aware of differences in pedagogical heritage when we talk about direct questioning because there are cultures I've worked with where the idea of peer-groups and self-directed learning would create huge tensions when the cultural expectation is one of being 'taught.' Such ideas need careful introduction and contextualising not to mention facilitation.

Nick

Hi Asif,
Good points. I think it comes down to viewing diversity as a resource rather than a challenge for learning doesn't it?

cheers,
Nick

Faculty of Education
University of Glasgow
Scotland

http://www.sharedthinking.info

Hi Everyone,
I think these seminars are great professional development and they raise issues about inter-cultural issues in this context. Coming in from the UK and working with others from other countries always makes me check myself to see if I'm making assumptions or being potentially offensive even with the best intentions.

However, I was interested in this seminar because it is a much bigger issue than I think is generally realised in a connected world. New models of collaboration and delivery are deeply related to this issue. For instance I worked with a tutoring team from China to tutor participants in Europe and China. The tutors faced the same task as the students to work together.

I also looked at the videos and you do notice a tendency towards a single perspective and a hint of others 'lacking' something. One of the challenges in inter-cultural learning on any environment is to build mutual understanding of the task and the process. This is rather than to make 'them like us' or 'us like them.' This takes time, a different and more open disposition and dialogue and different techniques.

I'll stop there before I run off on all kinds of tangents.

cheers,

Nick
Faculty of Education
University of Glasgow
Scotland

http://www.sharedthinking.info

Hi,
This search for and review of collaborative tools misses the key issue of the context under consideration. There is fun and appeal in exploring each new technology as it arises but it risks disregarding the context, rationale and aims of collaboration in the rush to 'see what we can use this for.' Certainly we need to understand different technologies but when do we discuss the goal and purpose and context? I would suggest that to ignore the pedagogy is bad practice.

Is this a discussion about distance learning or campus based learning? Is this really a discussion of collaboration or tools? Are we talking about staff or student development? Where is that context?

What about providing a notional case study of pedagogical need as a basis for considering a given tool? For example, what are the design goals and constraints of this activity in which we are engaged as a possible case study for staff development contexts? That would give you time, audience, activity design, aims and outcomes to evaluate amongst a host of other things. We are discussing de-contextualised ideas in at least 2 different places. The key 'time' factor may be that of how to save 'wasted time' for those involved in this collaboration. :)


Best wishes,
Nick


Nicholas Bowskill,
Faculty of Education
University of Glasgow,

Creator of Shared Thinking
http://www.sharedthinking.info

All good stuff but I think there may be some dangers here in talking about students developing collaborative skills. For me, this suggests that we've done our part and it's down to them to get developing. Or it suggests that these skills are a constant in an ever-changing world. Or that skills for collaboration are free of any consideration of the particular social context. Or that they are culturally blind and the same skills can be specified as somehow generic.

Different structures and activities organise collaboration differently and with different consequences. The skills required and the emphasis and self-control within such diversity means it may not be all down to the student and their notional skill-set. Often we shovel responsibility onto students in such settings and if it is not a success we implicitly suggest they didn't do enough. It may also be that the structure and scheduling and time available and whereabouts and the nature of the activities should carry as much responsibility for shaping collaboration. Also there are human variables in who we collaborate with! We live in a connected world where it is possible to collaborate globally but some cultures have different a pedagogical orientation and changes to this are more than the development of the 'skills.' Aren't they?

All of this leads me to think that throwing the term 'developing collaborative skills' around assumes an awful lot much of which needs careful unpacking. Have we really considered this in depth? Are we really thinking about a western understanding of these notional skills and in what context(s) are we discussing them? I don't have the answers but I certainly have a lot of questions about this stuff.