KM Self Study Part III

I began a self-study of my learning organization’s growth and flexibility, in hopes to better understand and articulate challenges we faced in adapting new educational paradigms and standards. These postings cover not only the daily occurrences at my college of education, but also some of the experiences I have had while working at other organizations. If you have questions or thoughts please email me at nsabir@indiana.edu.

Institutes of education managing change and shift: A reflective piece utilizing Daft’s framework (part III)

Bias, mission & goals

I think the “most dangerous” of biases Daft discusses is, seeing what you want to see: Not because you truly want to “see” something, but rather because the information we gather, interpret and present to others is constantly shaped by our epistemological and ontological underpinnings. I’m stealing this story from a workshop I ran while working with Organization D.

So, Organization D’s mission statement is something along the lines of a peaceful world and each department has specific/specialized goals targeted at regions or themes. The organization’s goal doesn’t face conflicting departmental goals so much as the message gets lost in all the moving parts and sometimes there are not clear guidelines. On September 21, Peace Day, K-12 educators tackle teaching complex issues of global conflicts and cultural awareness often using social media and synchronous technologies. A couple of years ago there were not too many model schools for this initiative, and teachers dreamt up great projects for their students to do. One the more common examples was Skyping/email a classroom across the world and then reflecting about the experience. In some cases the lack of organizational support/resources lead to a propagation of negative stereotypes, especially at the k-5 level (“Japanese people know origami.” “Koreans eat dogs and that is gross!” “Baby girls are killed because parents want a son.” and “Peace means you can travel wherever you want.” – Just to name a few that were brought up at this workshop). As teachers began to post their students’ work on online forums the banter began about how irresponsible the teachers and Organization D had been to allow students to internalize stereotypes that could lead to conflict.

I think that sometimes working with an organization’s mission statement can be a game of Telephone particularly when they are broad and allow departments a little too much freedom. While having a broad mission statement can be great because it allows you to cover a lot of ground, different parts need to certain have specific objectives that support the official goal.

In many of teams I have worked on, the problem is rather apparent, there is a ____ need and the difficulties lie in crafting solutions. Often times the problem is over simplified by managers, as they are not the individuals placed in the field and their foundation for identifying and understanding the problem is relayed through secondary channels. Because the services the organizations deliver are so embedded in in-country dynamics that crafting solutions becomes a greater focus. Our organizations proposed solutions and timelines are also heavily impacted by major stakeholders – so it becomes a bit of a juggling act.

In our case, because the focus is shifted towards finding a sustainable and compatible solutions for all parties the identification of the issue at hand tends to get brushed over. In the past I have seen this lead to all sorts of communication-based issues, loss of funding, misusing fiscal and time based resources, and I’ve even see projects fail shortly after the first round of evaluations.

While the analytical and researcher based curriculum team I work with attempts to institute changes leveraging an incremental decision model, where instructional concepts are put through an iterative development process to ensure a best fit, this far from what actually happens. In the past four years each terms begins with the goal of trying to replicate a systematic and incremental decision process yet after a couple of weeks that fades away. Because the curriculum development team has to account for student (user) diversity and variation in needs, and constant flux in environmental factors a garbage can model would be more appropriate. Throw into the mix that we have a 60% instructor turnover, annually, and retaining structure can become problematic. Overarching goals are ill-defined, and problems and solutions are often identified vague and attended to simultaneously leading to additional problems. More often than not our team crafts “solutions” for problems which don’t exist and may not even be an issue, and major problems are sometimes pushed to the side for another term (another batch to deal with). Do I think this is effective? No. However, it is the culture of my organization and my mangers’ preferred style to allow for a more organic approach.

It is far too easy to go along with a group or majority decision. This happens a bit differently in my team. We currently have 1 very hands off manager and 11 instructor-designers, who have equal say in how we facilitate our programme. While there are some team players that naturally take a more leadership role and others who are more outspoken about distinct issues, a groupthink mentality is often applied to major decisions. Now this isn’t because of a lack of expertise or diversity but rather an understanding of “let’s agree to disagree” and if we continue to “disagree” the team isn’t nearly as productive, if at all.

Fin.

KM Self Study Part II

I began a self-study of my learning organization’s growth and flexibility, in hopes to better understand and articulate challenges we faced in adapting new educational paradigms and standards. These postings cover not only the daily occurrences at my college of education, but also some of the experiences I have had while working at other organizations. If you have questions or thoughts please email me at nsabir@indiana.edu.

Institutes of education managing change and shift: A reflective piece utilizing Daft’s framework (part II)

Structure, control & culture

At my current job, we have a fairly decentralized system (for immediate interactions) which leads to a series of issues. In an effort to empower the workers and support their professional development management takes a more horizontal approach. However, we our departments have major communication issues and because some people are so attached to their work/frame of mind this has also lead to discrepancies in polices. Since all parties are not on the same page this imposes stagnant approaches to problems.

In our organization the most frequent trap is, “people don’t have enough time to learn.” Because our organization experiences a disruptive environment that requires constant reevaluation our employees are always having to relearn skills and procedures. For example, just last week a peer created a learning module that involved a specific set of software and today we discovered that our student-consumers don’t have access to it. This required a complete revamp of the module and all our staff had to learn new material and procedures in the span of a couple of days.

I think the most difficult step I have seen organizations encounter is the first step, setting up procedures and guidelines. My experiences have shown me that a lack of clear vision often makes the initial process difficult. I have seen firms have a vague vision of execution, access to resources, and reflection but in the process of establishing these steps the organization distinguishes their current direction from their ideal process. That said, I believe that the research findings lack one step, reevaluation of the model or steps. Somewhere along the process there should be a place for leadership to pause and assess if their current process is allowing employees to learn in the most effective and efficient means possible, and if the scaffolding holds up to desired outcomes.

I believe that organizations’ design and structure should be drive by their goals, needs and access to resources, rather than what is considered “best practice.” The text talks about how vertical structures are more efficient and horizontal structures encourage more personnel growth so I think that leveraging both aspects would be a good approach. Our process aligns more with virtual network grouping’s model. While this approach enables flexible and is responsive to changes in the environments, it can be difficult to coordinate and communicate with all member of the organization. The only times I have seen this grouping truly be effective/efficient is when someone very motivated, organized, and patient took the role of integrator.

For day-to-day operations the college of education functions as a pooled Interdependence system; however in the large scale it serves as a reciprocal interdependent system. All of the departmental outputs and procedures feed into one another at the end of the terms however weekly operations allow individual offices and departments to function as separate entities with standardized procedures. This multifaceted approach requires our organization to function with a very high level of communication and collaboration. More often we feel like a cross departmental team working as a single entity rather than separate offices. The logistics trains are not felt by most of the employees but rather the supervisors take on the initiatives to collaborate all of the reciprocated activities.

I think that organizational decisions should be driven by needs, and not what the managers see working at another organization and hope to replicate in their own. Before an organization (re)creates a hybrid structure leadership should consider the weakness that need to be addressed.

I used to freelance for a Country B’s pharmaceutical company, Company A, working with both the local branch and the overseas offices. In Country B the organization is very centralized and represents a typical functional grouping model, however the counterpart organization in State Z is completely different. Because the US branch is considerably smaller it outsources most of its marketing and large-scale production, and much of the staff work across several departments. As citizens of Country B liaisons come to State Z for a year or two many of them actually struggle with adapting to “lack of structure” and several have even opted to return to the Country B’s company because the hybrid model in the US organization was uncomfortable for them. I think it is interesting how an environmental culture impacts an organization’s culture so heavily.

The term effectiveness and measuring an organization’s effectiveness does seems to get a bit ambiguous without a bounded case paired alongside. The goal based approach focuses more on the holistic meeting of an overarching organizational goal while the internal process approaches focuses more on internal workings, such as positive work environment and organizational morale, and not on the organization’s output. One of the great features about using a resource-based approach is that it includes the initial bargaining mix and can include the environment-organization factors.

At my current position several leadership department and offices have a very centralized command structure, which is bounded by accreditation, fiscal and international policy constraints. This bureaucratic system constrained employees to follow set protocols and stifled creativity. Several supervisors and office directors have shifted organizations’ directions by changing their leadership style to account for employee empowerment by moving from a bureaucratic to clan style of leadership and management. This transformation has been a slow progress with slight changes over several years and plenty of employee turnover. This shift allowed employees to further bring their expertise into the design of services.

To be continued…

KM Self Study Part I

I began a self-study of my learning organization’s growth and flexibility, in hopes to better understand and articulate challenges we faced in adapting new educational paradigms and standards. These postings cover not only the daily occurrences at my college of education, but also some of the experiences I have had while working at other organizations. If you have questions or thoughts please email me at nsabir@indiana.edu.

Institutes of education managing change and shift: A reflective piece utilizing Daft’s framework (part I)

Bureaucracy, leadership, & delegation

Well, I think that overly bureaucratic organizations waste resources energy and are slightly inefficient, I don’t believe they are formed with ill intent but a rather formed over time to fulfill various needs as they arose. Perhaps my views are tainted while working in institutes of higher education for the past five years. In some of the more complex organizations I have seen an over emphasis on functional goals rather than an organization’s mission. As a complexity of each department grows, the accountability in day-to-day demands also increases. Additionally, I think the fear of immediate loss, whether it be a material resource or personal, outweighs a motivation for long-term gain.

While working on a research project abroad I experienced this form of bureaucratic structure personally. Because the staff was so focused on not losing critical resources and not wasting time they lost sight of the larger picture: evaluating the state of vocational education in a fragile society. To revamp the focus, one of the team’s project manager (re)evaluated the goals to move from a rule and procedure base to a larger picture. I believe the goal was to have employees move for a narrowminded focus, centered on day-to-day activities, to one that better incorporated the organizations mission.

While working for my department, a college of education, our group currently faces two main issues: leadership and delegation. When a group of instructional designers was constructed there was one supervisor. However the supervisor was more of a coordinator and less of a leader. To remedy this issue the group decided each individual would take on different leadership based roles. However it does quickly became an issue as boundaries and positions were not clearly defined. Our designers began to overstep each other in a deconstructive manner as the each tried to push their own agenda. (Again there was no ill intent – We all genuinely believed what we were doing was in the best interest of our students.) And, soon the issue went from a lack of leadership to too many cooks in the kitchen. To better establish boundaries as a cohort the instructional designers divided up responsibilities, tasks and timelines. Currently this is where our organization stands; it is trying to manage leadership, employee empowerment, co-design and co-learning, and task delegation. Looking back at four years of organizational restructuring, I think had we set aside specific boundaries and structures, the overpowering leadership and lack of delegation would not be as much of an issue as it stands today.

To be continued…

Real-Time Audio Reflection of Video Analysis for Action Research

A right of passage for many teachers is a foundational video case analysis of their teaching, recorded and previewed by external faculty and staff members.  This practice is in place for pre-service teachers, teachers under review at new schools, and even associate instructors at the university level. While often viewed as a slightly intimidating process, the video review process is integral in establishing action research ideals for teachers.

The reflection process is crucial to not only the teacher’s development but also for enhancing their instructional approaches.  Many teacher preparatory programs strive to teach future teachers reflective practices that directly inform their action (Hatton & Smith, 1995).  Teachers need to think critically about, and learn from their past experiences through meaningful reflective practices.

While reflections can take place through listening, speaking, drawing, and any other way imaginable, the most meaningful reflections often take place after watching yourself perform tasks.  The idea is for teachers to video record themselves and capture objective descriptions of what happened, discuss feelings, ideas and analysis, and discuss how they reacted as a result of the experience.  The figure below represents the reflection process (adopted from Quinsland & Van Ginkel, 1984).

According to Quinsland and Van Ginkel (1984), processing is a practice that encourages one to reflect, describe, analyze, and communicate their experiences. The processing and reflection will not only allow for an enhanced learning experience but will also contribute to the teaching and learning of future students.  Past literature has shown that critical reflection will increase learning, understanding, and retention (Daudelin, 1996).  Additionally it invokes a process of taking meanings and moving them into learning (Mezirow, 1990).

The process of reflection is critical to action research (Kemmis, 1985), and action research need to be systematic (Gore & Zwichner, 1991; Price, 2001) that creates questions and answers them in the teaching context.  Historically, many teachers use a variety of tools such as observation logs and reflective journals (Darling-Hammond, 2012).

This activity will walk you though that process:

The first step is to insert the video observation into ELAN.  Give the video an initial viewing and add in annotations.  Annotations should be reflections of your teaching and immediate methods, they can also be ideas that you wish to further explore and revisit.

The second step is to create an audio-based discussion. As the video is playing, create an audio recording of your immediate reflections.  During the second video run-through, stop the recording periodically to voice record your thoughts.

Place the audio recording into the ELAN platform, synchronizing the wave with the video observation.  Once you silence your observational video you will be able to listen to your thought process overlayed to your observational data.  Another way of looking at this overlay: The reflected audio file replaces the audio component of the video observation.  This will allow you to pair your analysis to the observation, reflecting the moments of instruction.

Once audio and video, with annotations, are embedded and synced, add a second layer of annotations based on the alignment between your audio reflections.  This can be areas for improvement, implications for future practices, and moments that surprise you.  By integrating aspects of verbal, visual, and kinesthetic cues, teachers can establish retrieval systems that will allow them to change practices on the fly.

These approaches will allow teachers to self-reflect and create keys that indicate needs for change.  This systemic approach to identifying problems and providing solution, take a critical approach to teacher-based action research.  The benefit of using video and audio based reflections is the fluid and organic nature of reflection that allow teachers to improve their instructional techniques effectively (Altrichter, Feldman, Posch, & Somekh, 2013).

References

Altrichter, H., Feldman, A., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (2013).Teachers investigate their work: An introduction to action research across the professions. New York, NY: Routledge.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2012).Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Daudelin, M. (1996). Learning from Experience Through Reflection. Organizational Dynamics, 24(3), 36-48.

Gore, J. M., & Zeichner, K. M. (1991). Action research and reflective teaching in preservice teacher education: A case study from the United States.Teaching and teacher education,7(2), 119-136.

Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation.Teaching and teacher education,11(1), 33-49.

Kemmis, S. (1985). Action research and the politics of reflection. In D. Boud, R. Keogh & D. Walker (Eds.),Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning(pp. 139-164). New York, NY: Routledge.

Mezirow, J. (1990). How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. Fostering critical reflection in adulthood, 1-20.

Price, J. N. (2001). Action research, pedagogy and change: The transformative potential of action research in pre-service teacher education. Journal of Curriculum Studies,33(1), 43-74.

Quinsland, L. K. & Van Ginkel, A. (1984). How to Process Experience. The Journal of Experiential Education, 7 (2), 8-13.

 

Digital diaries

Blogs are becoming ever popular for researchers and teachers.  They are used as a source of archiving thoughts, starting conversations, and housing resources.  In my teaching teachers course we talk about the importance of instructors having blogs and websites.  Not only are they a source of information but they are also valuable tools in establishing digital identities.  Overall blogs have emerged as a creative spaces that allow users to carry on a “persistent conversation” (Paulus, Lester & Dempster, 2014, p. 15), and represent a multi-user environment which is not platform restrictive.

More importantly these digital diaries are more than simple text. They allow for hyperlinking of content, embedding visual tools (such as videos or images), and are sometimes video or audio based entries.  Many of the blogging tools used by teachers and educational researchers are very personal expressions and accounts.  They incorporate happenings, ideals, and current issue of concern.  Their posting of text and visuals allows blog visitors to gain a richer illustration of the blogger’s life experiences.  These interactive communicative diaries are often linked to social networks, and “respond to new conditions” (Willi, Melewar, & Broderick, 2013, p. 103) of identity creation.  In other words they allow the blogger to develop a holistic online identity centered around their diary postings, pertaining to issues deemed of value.

So we talked a bit about online identities and blog…what about the other aspects?  Well there is this notion centered about reflexivity, and using blogs as tools to streamline that process.  Let’s start by first defining reflexive practices.  Paulus, Lester and Dempster define this as, “the process of intentionally attending to the perspectives, attitudes and beliefs that shape how you design a research study and make sense of your data” (2014, p. 13).  In other words, how is ‘you as a person’ impacting a situation.  This doesn’t have to be in the realm of data collection or research design, while it might often be related to those two areas.

Let’s ground this fuzzy concept with any example of action research.  A new 3rd grade teacher is welcoming his class during the first week of school and notices that two of his (international) students aren’t socializing with their peers, nor are they speaking up, participating in class, and they even refuse to make eye contact.  Now there are several ways an inexperienced teacher might reflect on these issues. He might think that something is wrong with the students: maybe they are just shy or perhaps they are having troubles adjusting to the new classroom.  He might not even stop to consider that they students come from a different school culture and that instead of changing them he might have to change his approach.

Had this teacher kept a journal he might be able to look over what changes positively impacted his classroom and make changes accordingly.  Additionally, if he kept an online blog perhaps his online community of teachers might have been able to offer suggestions and possible resources. And so, we come back to this concept of changing or practices based on our reflections, and realizing how we impact our design.  They don’t always have to be grounded in the concept of research.

So we have reflective practices and establishing digital footprints and creating conversations.

Let me shift gears and tell you about a great way to aggregate your diary posts and notice trends, themes and issue of importance. Often times when I site down to blog, I start writing about a topic and it takes an interesting turn…sometimes I run off on tangents.  At the end of each blog entry I push all my talking points into a word cloud and use those as my tags. This allows me to self-evaluate what I am really talking about and sometimes enlightens me to the topics that are most prevalent in my entry.  Consider using word cloud tools to thematically analyze, code even, your digital diary.  There are some great websites out there, and Wordle and Tagxedo are two of the best I have found.  Both are fairly simple to use and allow for a customizable experience. Simply copy and paste your text into the box and create! Wordle is simple, clean, and classic (Wordle even recognized a plethora of other examples), while Tagxedo allows for more customization.  Make sure you have Microsoft Silverlight and Java up to date. 

Here is an example of what a word cloud of this post may look like

Using Wordle

Using Tagxedo

References

Harricharan, Michelle and Bhopal , Kalwant (2014) Using blogs in qualitative educational research: an exploration of method. International Journal of Research & Method in Education (In Press).

Paulus, T. M., Lester, J. N., & Dempster, P. G. (2014). Digital tools for qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Willi, C. H., Melewar, T. C., & Broderick, A. J. (2013). Virtual brand-communities using blogs as communication platforms and their impact on the two-step communication process: A research agenda. The Marketing Review, 13(2), 103-123.

Looking to make the most out of your blog? Check out Bolles’  blog posting on using blogs as a research tool. Not only does it write about his personal experiences but has used the text-based blogging feature to transcribe his video blog.

Perpetual Heart Break Machine

These past two weeks my students submitted their feedback evaluating the course, my instructional strategies and suggesting improvements. In looking over the initial feedback, I felt it was somewhat heart breaking in their honestly in commenting. In actually averaging their ratings it wasn’t so bad. While most of the comments were negative I realized that they were not directed at me, persay, but the structure of the course. So I moved from being slightly distraught about not being an effective or engaging teacher…to not being able to really implement the changes they suggested.
For example, an overwhelming number of students hated the 3-hour-long 8 am class (not something I had control over) and suggested the class over two weeks. While I cannot control the length or scheduled time, I feel like I should be able to engross and entertain the students enough so that they don’t notice the horribly early and long class.

Another suggestion that came up was reduce the number of PowerPoint (slides) and reduce the number of assignments. Again this wasn’t something I can directly control, as all class sections have the same work load. While realizing that the work load can be overwhelming, I try to give the students additional ‘lab time’ so that they can work on projects. Even though I have been implementing this from the beginning, students still commented that it was not enough. Every week I struggle with trying to balance lecture, engaging discussions and in-class time for projects. Generally a third to half of my class time is devoted to ‘lab-time’ and it still doesn’t seem to be enough.

There was a hiccup in implementing the survey and it was administer twice, the first time 18 of 23 students responded later only 8 resubmitted their thoughts. Half of the questions were on a likert-scale (of 5 or 4). The first time (4-scale) the students agreed the course as outstanding by 2.5 of 4, the second time (5-scale) it improved to 3.5 of 5. Next the students evaluated the outstanding nature of the instructor. Both surveys were very close in response with a 2.7 of 4, first time, and a 2.9 of 5, the second time marking the teacher as outstanding.
The following responses were drawn from the second survey administration. The students rated the clear communication of content as a 2.5 of 5. The students rated the clarity of explanation of requirements/expectations/assignment as a 3 out of 5. Students rated appropriate use of class time as a 2.5 out of 5. On a more positive note the students felt that the instructor was creatively using teaching strategies, ranking it a 3.2 of 5. Lastly, the students noted that the instructor gave timely feedback by rating it 2.3 out of 5.

When students were asked about recommendation to improve the course and suggestions to the instructor a majority of the students responded that the course had too many things due (n=6), with overwhelming due dates and expressed a need to consolidate class resources. An additional student commented that the content housed to many resources and websites. Within the actual class structure, students commented that the class was too long and too early in the morning (n=4). A couple of the students mentioned that there needs to be less PowerPoint (n=3), less in class discussions (n=1), and more time in class to work on projects, homework, and assignments (n=4). Additionally these lectures needed more consistency from week to week (n=2), more explanations/instruction (n=1), and a great focus on projects not on in-class examples (n=1).
There were three students who commented that the instructor was doing alright. Another two students mentioned that student not be graded as stringently. Lastly, one student commented that “the instructor could assist the students in a less sarcastic manner.” These two points are aspects that I feel I have the greatest control in changing and will work diligently in the coming weeks to explain my grading manner and appear less sarcastic.

When students were asked to list things that they did not want to change they discusses the general content and diversity of technology introduced (n=9), the benefits of the projects, particularly the digital story (n=2), the real-world application of the teacher websites and ePortfoilo (n=2), and the scaffold nature of the course (n=1). Moreover the students did not want to see changes in the structure, content, or method by which the PowerPoint were displayed (n=4). As far as the instructor specific embellishments the students liked the text reminders (n=1), the ease and timely manner of receiving feedback (n=2), and that I do not allow my students to procrastinate on projects (n=2). Additionally a student appreciated the structure of the course that allowed students to choose independent and group projects.

Most meaningful aspects of the course were identified as the creation of the teacher and ePortfolio websites (n=8), introduction of the tools, such as Google drive, Skype and Google docs (n=6), and the utilization and discussion of the 3Es (4 in my class, engagement, enhancement, effectiveness, efficiency) (n=5). Students also noted that the content exploration tools/tasks (n=1) and production tools/tasks (n=2), as well as class projects, such as the digital stories (n=2), case analysis (n=1), webquests (n=1) as meaningful activities.
Least meaningful aspects of the course were claimed to be the digital story project (n=2), and all the video editing that accompanied the project (n=8), along with the case analysis (n=5) and webquests (n=2), commenting particularly on the lack of application of early education teachers. Lastly students noted that the teacher and ePortfolio websites (n=1), “busy work” and “time wasters” in class (n=1), demonstrations in class (n=1), the Go Animate (n=1) and voki (n=1) clips, and the use of Google documents (n=1) were not useful to the class.

And for the random student who suggested a picnic: let’s have one when the weather gets a little warmer!

Evaluations in teaching

Part of being an instructor is getting evaluated. When you first walk into the classroom students begin forming opinions about you, it gets worse as soon as you open your mouth to speak. In short, they are evaluating you…maybe they are judging your outfit or blood-shot eyes , or maybe they are assessing the right time to ask for a bathroom break. It really doesn’t matter what their focus is because in the end they are observing, gathering information and making a judge about who you are and how you teach. Unnerving, right?

Well it isn’t so bad…you actually get used to it after teaching for a couple of months. It isn’t the first days of class that frighten me it is weeks later when I am driving home or at the gym that the thought occurs to me, “what could I have done to make that class better? more engaging?” Oh no, now I’ve done it. I’ve gone and opened a can of worms that refuse to settle down quietly.