Design. Learn. Solve.

Collective Action

The video below is of Marshall Ganz, an community expert and a key player in developing the 2008 Obama campaign. In his talk, at the Berkman Center in 2008, he spoke about how to create collective action. While he may have been referring to the political world, the same principles apply now when we look at creating action in the world of education.

In particular, Ganz focuses on how to use organizing, collective action, and mobilization to initiate change. He mentions that change comes when individual preferences are turned into common focuses, which can lead to the capacity to act upon them. When we look at making changes in our schools, we must find a common thread among the teachers and administrators. This does not mean we must have mandates, rather it means we must find a common idea or belief and give individuals in this group the ability to take action as a group.

How do we make this happen?

Leadership

It is the “practices that enable others to achieve purpose in the face of uncertainty”. In other words, leadership is comprised of practices that enable groups to work effectively. This could mean creating teams, or Personal Learning Communities, that bridge departments to enable this to happen. These groups could be run by seasoned facilitators to ensure success. This role of facilitator would rotate after others were trained on how to run the groups.

Community

In addition to strong leadership, a community rises from a stable entity capable of exercising collective agency. If this is the case, teachers will feel empowered and not isolated; they will be willing to make a change.

Power

The power of a community rests in its ability to use resources (time, energy, materials) purposeful to take change. We must evaluate how we, as schools, use these recourses to create change.

Key Factors

Along with the previous three factors, Ganz mentions that the following are necessary conditions for effective collective action.

Shared values

Values are broader than interests and sources of motivation. Values are communicated emotionally. To achieve this we need narrative and empathy not just metrics and data.

Shared interests

To build this collective capacity, we must create relational interests (1 on 1 meetings are key for this to develop). Is there a basis for working together? Are we able to commit to one another?

Shared structure

We must have common purpose and shared norms. There must be trained leaders and structures for our initiatives to succeed. Structure leads to ability to create change.

Shared strategy

“Turn what you have into what you need to get what you want.” Adapt based upon real time information and needs. It is the purposeful and most creative part of organizing. Any strategy will shift but as long as the group buys into the common goal, it will happen.

Shared action

Resources are time, material items, and energy. The mobilization and deployment of resources are essential to make change. Resources can only be effective when “the outcomes are clear, … specific and…can be learned from”.

Finally

While technology can be at the center of making this all happen, Ganz reminds us about carpenters and tools. Investment in skilled carpenters allows the tools to be used in effectively. We must spend our time in developing the human capital in schools. We must understand the community and determine the human needs before we blindly invest our time or money in technology.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhCoz5hMhTI[/youtube]

Photo credit: mike.bendetti

Change Isn’t Bad, Is It? Part 2

Last week I posted two articles, one by Nicholas Carr of the Atlantic and one by the Economist. Both took a stance on technology and it’s impact upon our society. I wanted to discuss their arguments and present my own opinion.

The Atlantic

Nicholas Carr argues that the Internet has adversely affected how we think. We no longer deep read. He believes that because we are flooded with information through sources like Google we are losing the ability to synthesize information due to the over load of data. While he does state that technology like the Gutenburg Press was received with similar skepticism, his analysis focuses on the fact that the advancement in technology is changing the way we think and that is a bad thing.

The Economist

The Economist article takes a less aggressive stance toward the influence of the Internet and search upon our culture. The author agrees that we are changing but argues that is not necessarily a bad thing. The author continues to state that change is inevitable and if we continue to hold on to the status quo as though it is the only way to think and learn we will do ourselves and future generations a major disservice. The quote that resonated the most with me was the following:

So, no surprise that when we incarcerate teenagers of today in traditional classroom settings, they react with predictable disinterest and flunk their literacy tests. They are skilled in making sense not of a body of known content, but of contexts that are continually changing.

Teachers must recognise that our pedagogical tools are inconsistent with the skills needed to survive in a world where people are always connected to everyone and everything. In such a world, learning to think for oneself could well be more important than simply learning to read and write.

My Opinion

When examining technology’s influence upon our culture, of course it has changed us. Is that a bad thing?  Absolutely not. It provides us with opportunities and challenges that would have never been present if the technology was not available. It has made my students more globally aware. When I was my student’s age, I had did not know as much about events happening around the world. We were to simply memorize facts. Now my students are discussing global issues with schools around the world. Technology has also opened doors for people around the world to present their ideas and have a change to achieve the supposed “American Dream”.

Technology has “flattened” our world. Some like, Carr may argue that the technology has negatively influenced us as we now manage information. But I believe that the advantages of technology: the ability to connect to information almost instantly, the communal environment it has created, and the equity it has allowed heavily outweigh Carr’s argument.

Creative and innovative ideas are now more widely accessible and the ability to solve today’s global problems will be easier as you have more and more perspectives on these problems. Technology’s ability to connect people around the world builds upon the idea of the Wisdom of Crowds. Problems will be solved by not simply relying upon a few minds but opening them to the public. So while we may lose a few skills with the advancement of technology, it is technology that will help us save our planet.

photo credits: Mrs. Maze and Jimee, Jackie, Tom & Asha