Joitske Hulsebosch pinned this video on Pinterest and it immediately became inspiration for this weeks (irregular) Monday Video. First, take a look. Just 2 minutes 3 seconds. via Strange Meeting - YouTube. Fun to see, and slightly ironic as my work travel schedule is about to, um, take flight. Now I travel to facilitate longer form meetings — 3-5 day things that would be painful online, but I have to say, I wish we were progressing with our telephone and web meeting practices and tools a bit faster. I have been beta testing MeetingBurner (I have a future blog post in draft form) and had such high hopes, but in practical use I’ve run into some problems which I think are fundamental. Is it because I have "weird" online meeting habits or that tools and practices are still stuck in broadcast mode? Here are a few of the areas that I’ve been working on that have improved my synchronous online meetings… and they seem to be to be both fundamental to healthy meeting practices as much as about technologically mediated meetings. 1. Make the meeting matter. Don’t have a meeting to broadcast information; it should be for meaning making, relationship building, working on challenges or thinking TOGETHER. These all imply active listening and response (a.k.a "conversation") and full on interaction. 2. Be interactive. Don’t bore me PLEASE!!! There is a place for broadcast "webinars" but ONLY ONLY ONLY if the tool enables meaningful participant interaction and the presenter wants to and has the skills to interact. Otherwise send me a link to a video or audio, thankyouverymuch. And by interaction, that does NOT mean just a Q&A tool or the ability to chat with the person controlling the platform (GoToMeeting, I am not your fan.) It means open chat rooms where participants can know who else is participating, chat with them, and if there are a lot of chatters, someone to help weave the chat with what the presenter is doing. (Edit: See this post from EEKim about meaningful conversations at meetings.) 3. There is facility for joint artifact creation. This means joint note taking (a la http://www.meetingwords.com) and, in my personal ideal, a shared whiteboard with good writing tools that everyone can access (whether that permission is turned on or off selectively is again a process question.) I could write tons more about the generative practice of both shared meeting note taking and drawing together. I’ll spare you this morning… 4. Be embodied. There is facilitaty for images or video of the participants. Now I’m not a video fan. I work at home, often at dreadfully early morning hours and you do NOT want to see me. But a picture of me does bring a bit more humanity. And there are times when video is really useful. And times when it is distracting so we need to be smart enough to discern when to use it! Four is probably enough for one blog post. Where do you stand on online meetings?

(Note: this post was scheduled month ago and got hung up. Just found it today!) Since I got my iPad, one of the apps I’ve been playing with a lot is Evernote. I can prepare and/or take notes, incorporate images, etc from a meeting then send the notes via email to participants, or even make a note public. Here is my preparation note for the Graphic facilitation workshop I led at the Rome Based ShareFair last September, along with one photo from the workshop.  Here is a note snippet from Etienne Wenger’s keynote at the ShareFair. Here are very brief notes from the community case clinics Etienne and I did at the Fair. I have used this feature mostly for sending private notes to meeting participants as what I do on the iPad is usually pretty rough. I’ve found it pretty speedy and efficient. I can always fix the spelling when I get back to my desktop, as I still make a lot of typos on the iPad’s keyboard.  I like the low profile of the iPad vs the wall that even a small netbook creates on a lap or table. More generally, I need to think about how to best organize my Evernote notes. I’m using it to read articles I’ve saved using Instapaper and ReadLater which make it easy to collect online content to read on the pad when I’m offline. But I tend to collect more than I read. So there are some workflow issues to sort out.  I still havent’ figured out my workflow relationship between readitlater and tagging on services like delicious. So many conundrums as I evolve my technology configuration. What new tool(s) are you playing with?

Check out this fabulous post by Geoff Brown, Simplifying my digital habits | Yes and Space. I have to share the image he created which helps make sense of the configuration. Brilliant. Thanks, Geoff!

Just a quick addition to my two posts on facilitation card decks (here and here). This one is for a geocentric exploration of a place. COOL! The Drift Deck (Analog Edition) is an algorithmic puzzle game used to navigate city streets. A deck of cards is used as instructions that guide you as you drift about the city via Drift Deck | Near Future Laboratory. Here is a peek at the cards… Near Future Laboratory Drift Deck 2008 View more documents from bleeckerj

Rob Cottingham is always coming up with cool new stuff. He is the first person I knew to create cartoons about social media. He was one of the first people I graphically recorded "up front" (instead of from the back) at NorthernVoice a few years back (sadly, the video is now gone but you can see the images here). So when he invited me to be his first guest on the Social Speech Podcast, I had to say yes. Here are the deets: The social web has gone a long way toward changing what it means to be in the audience at a speech - making an audience member less a passive spectator listening to a monologue, and more an active participant in a conversation among peers. And nobody does that quite like Nancy White - except she doesn’t just rely on digital technology. She’s one of the best group facilitators in the business, working all over the world with everyone from small community groups to Fortune 500 companies. You can see her approach at work in the March of Dimes’ Share Your Story site, which several years on is still one of the examples we cite the most often of how online community can make a real different in people’s lives. So who better to kick off Episode 1 of the Social Speech podcast? (Graphic: A quick sketch I (Rob)  did of Nancy at Northern Voice a few years ago.)   Thanks, Rob! You can download the podcast on Rob’s site.

Via a G+ post I stumbled upon Tim Kitchin’s comment which totally captures why visuals matter to me in group process. I have been taking two paragraphs to day it. Tim boils it down and makes me smile. Disagreements about words become a cause of demolition.  Disagreements about images are an excuse for construction. via Steal this Brand Too » Blatancy and the Social Object Factory. Thanks Tim. (By the way, dear readers, the rest of the post is also really interesting!)

Alan Levine has a great new video shared via the Flat Classroom Project that took me back to some thinking I did with some pals at the University of Reading’s OdinLab (UK) in 2010. We were pondering how to talk about identity, particularly in the internet era. The OdinLab folks had a project for university students called "This is Me" and I did a remix for Librarians as part of some work I was doing in the US. I loved that Alan presented his ideas about identity through three "slices" of his public self, and that Alan himself is generous about all sides of his life. (Makes for good friends!) I chuckled at the mention of staying in the homes of people he had met "only" online… my husband has been chuckling at me for this since 1996, inviting in what he called, even way back then, my "imaginary friends." But we all know, you aren’t imaginary! Take a look at this 13+ minute video. Alan asks some questions that are worth our time. I particularly like the bit at the end when he asks not just about our individual identity, but the "we" — our collective representation and identity online. Cool! We, Our Digital Selves, and Us - Flat Classroom Project.

A gem from Alan Levine. I’m nodding in total agreement. "Nuff said. "I fully buy into the idea that small acts of regular creativity is not only good practice, but good for the soul. I have no proof, just my own case study." My case study agrees with your casestudy, Cogdog! via We Want YOU! (to daily create) (and add more) (please?) - CogDogBlog.

Yay! A kindle edition of  Digital Habitats: stewarding technology for communities is now available! As John wrote on the book blog, It has been a while in coming! People have been asking about an e-book version of Digital Habitats since it was published almost 3 years ago!  It seems logical, given that technology is a central theme of the book.  Especially when it’s been assigned as reading in a class or workshop and people have scruples about using paper. Now Digital Habitats is now available in a Kindle edition for $9.99: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007P6I7SO It turns out that all those tables and pictures that make the book a practical handbook made it take a lot longer to put it in an electronic format.  And it took us a while to get to it. Eventually it will be available on other platforms, but we’re starting with Kindle since free Kindle apps are available on Windows, Mac, iPhone, iPad, BlackBerry, Android and Windows Phone 7! The electronic version goes with the other resources we’ve provided online, such as: Diagrams and worksheets: http://technologyforcommunities.com/excerpts/ Tool and practice descriptions: http://cpsquare.org/wiki/Technology_for_Communities_project Chapter 10 "Action Notebook" in an editable Google-Doc format: http://bit.ly/DH-chapter10

The Four Fold Practice « Chris Corrigan is a great bit of advice for how to mindfully work and be together. Take a look. Here are a few snippets that I really appreciated: "None of us are smart enough to have the answers. To co-create something is to benefit from diversity and to stay in the relationship…even when you don’t know where things are going." "Pay equal attention to work and relationships."  

For some reason today my blog software noted a pingback from an old post from 2008 as noted by Patti Anklam. So I followed the link back to my original post and was once again struck by Bill Anderson’s Haiku. Here is the text from the post.  Bill Anderson adds to the repetoire of conference capture techniques with Haiku Notes from SXSW with PRAXIS101: SXSW 2008 Reflection: Free association as a note-taking practice. Your social footprint. Or your ghost on the network. You have to choose one. Of course, to complement the text, I’ll grab one of Bill’s colleague’s visual efforts, an image from Honoria Starbuck via Haiku as Conference Capture | Full Circle Associates. You have to choose. Bill was and IS still so right. Our digital traces are everywhere. How do we choose to leave our footprints? Something to think about. But the sun is out. Now back to the garden after an old trace reawaked Bill’s Haiku! (And Bill, blog, will ya!)

I’m bumping this post back up so it can get on the radar screen. We extended the early bird price to April 30th. I know, I know… it is hard to plan this far in advance. Michelle and I know this — and of course, we worry a bit with location deposits, etc. But we TRUST THE UNIVERSE. Besides, I find this workshop so much fun, I told Michelle I’m willing to work for free if we only have a small group.  I learned new things this year I want to share. I want to learn for y’all. So I am sure more of you will turn up. That’s part of how the ‘ole universe works, right? So, once again, here are the details: Michelle Laurie and I are excited to announce the 3rd annual graphic facilitation workshop (aka Rosviz!) in beautiful Rossland, BC, Canada, July 18-20th, 2012. We had so much fun at #1 and #2, we are going for #3! (See Sylvia’s great video from #2 here.) Drawing on Walls at the 2011 Graphic Facilitation Workshop in Rossland, B.C. You are invited to this experiential workshop which takes place almost entirely at the drawing surface! We’ll start the evening of July18th by warming up our drawing muscles and silencing those pesky inner censors. The second day, we’ll build into the basic practices of graphic facilitation and recording. We will pay attention to preparation, the actual visual work, and follow up including digital capture of paper based images. Our third day will be devoted to participatory graphic approaches, practicing and giving peer feedback. You can expect to go away with icons, ideas and approaches which you can use immediately, as well as ideas about how to hone your practice. When might we use this practice? Sometimes our imaginations are sparked by a visual where words fail us. Think about when communities plan and imagine their futures, when teams consider the possible outcomes for their projects, when groups create maps to track their progress.  These are all opportunities to use visuals to engage and deepen community dialogue. You can use visual thinking to improve teamwork, communications, meetings, build engagement and to plan work. Step out of the PowerPoint rut! Who should attend? Facilitators, project managers, team leaders and members, town planners, teachers and anyone who would like to engage others beyond words. Please Note: You do NOT need previous experience or have to consider yourself an artist. At some level, we can all draw and use visuals to enhance our communications and engage diverse audiences. Quick details: Michelle will be hosting and we’ll both be co-facilitating. This 2.5 day workshop begins the evening of Wednesday, July 18th and ends mid-afternoon on Friday, July 20th.  Early bird pricing before April 30th is CA $690.00 and is CA $840.00 thereafter. (US Friends — it is about the same in dollars! If you have/want to pay in dollars, I can take those. NW)  Email Michelle to register: michelle.k.laurie(@)gmail.com. via Workshop Alert - Rosviz is back! | Michelle Laurie rants and raves.

Choconancy1 posted a photo:

Choconancy1 posted a photo:

Lately I’m more on the road than home. I’ve been incorporating visual methods into all my work (see here and here) but it will be fun to do some local graphico stuff. Tonight our local informal group of visual practitioners joins for conversation, snacks, and of course, drawing. Then in a week, I get to record Stephanie West Allen’s presentation at the NR Dispute Resolution conference. I’ve known Stephanie online for quite some time, and finally, face to face! (Thanks to neighbor Rina Goodman!) Here are the deets: I spoke at this annual conference two years ago and found the people—organizers, presenters, and attendees— to be warm, curious, skillful, and farsighted. They are also a brainy gang, paying attention to neuroscience. For the second year in a row, Dr. John Medina is speaking! I am very happy to be returning to Seattle, and look forward to seeing old faces and meeting new conflict resolution pros. Below is the description of my program. Click to see the full brochure and read the program and to register. Exciting news: My program will be graphically recordedby Nancy White, an international leader among graphic recorders. (She’s in Zambia right now.) My presentation: Total-Brain Mediation: The Whole Brain and Nothing but the Truth Presenter: Stephanie West Allen, Allen & Nichols Productions, Inc., Denver, CO The field of conflict resolution is now filled with neuroscience myths, fiction and urban legends. We will look at what we REALLY know right now and how we can use that valid and accurate knowledge to move forward in the field. The best way to resolve conflict and to serve our clients is to make sure that we are using the complete brain, not just bits and pieces. Unfortunately much of mediation today is half-brained, at best. We neglect those parts of our brain that contain genuine, sustaining creativity and wisdom. This seminar will be mind-changing. Attendees will learn how to use the whole brain and nothing but the truth. Based on the latest in the neuroscience of learning, the seminar will be interactive, novel, fun … and maybe a bit messy. via idealawg: Join us in Seattle May 4-5? 19th Northwest Dispute Resolution Conference.

Choconancy1 posted a photo:

It is a crazy, busy spring this year, with many wonderful learning adventures with my clients. More about that later on. But I wanted to get a few events on the radar screen of my North American readers, particularly those of you in the Northwest region. Canada’s favorite blogging-cum-social media gathering, Northern Voice, is coming up the 15th and 16th of June in Vancouver, BC. I’m happy to say I’m going to get into trouble and co-instigate a session related to risk taking and improvisation the the irrepressible Alan Levine and Rob Cottingham. For a bit, I had lost the description we had submitted and I thought, "well, we’ll just improvise.!" But Alan reminded me our conversation was in Skype, so I grabbed the transcript. Here it is… maybe you have some ideas and suggestions?   The poet Guillaume Apollinaire wrote: Come to the edge, he said. They said: We are afraid. Come to the edge, he said. They came. He pushed them… and they flew. Perfection. Bah. Certainty? You’re crazy. Our participation in the (social) world cannot be predicated by "looking good" or having a perfect plan if we are to move our learning and our practices forward. The opportunity in the moment is a rich space. So prepare to be surprised. Plan and then go with the flow, even if that means abandoning your plans. Come play with Alan, Rob and Nancy (plus our richly surprising networks) as we explore the role of improvisation in our online lives. Heck, offline too. Why not? Come jump off the cliff. Bios: Nancy White Alan Levine Rob Cottingham Three crazy people who love to leap and learn. And learn and leap. And have fun. I also raised my hand to help co-organize the open space part of the event, fondly called "Moose Camp" with the equally irrepressible Brian Lamb. Can you spell F-U-N? Michelle Laurie, Giulia Forsythe and I will be hosting one session for visual practitioners (aka graphicos) at Moose Camp. I love the invitation to create what suggests itself in the moment. This seems consistent with our "formal" session offering. Kind of ironic, eh? The day before (June 14th), my amazingly productive and generative colleague Sylvia Currie hosts the annual Online Community Enthusiast’s gathering where we will be thinking together about the practice of designing and facilitating online meetings — among other things. It is great that this is piggy-backing up against Northern Voice. Again, this is an event YOU can come to as well! So if you are in the neighborhood, JOIN US! I promise it will be fun and rewarding. Honest! Bring your pens, chalk, ipads, cameras, but above all, bring your SELF!

People often ask me, "how do you know if a community is healthy and thriving, particularly through online cues?"  As some of you know, I lump these into a category I call "community indicators." Two harder to quantify indicators are love and a sense of humor. Today I’d like to observe a bit about the power of humor. This morning as I was reading the daily email digest of the Seattle Farm Coop, humor was abundant. The warm kind, not the sharp point of a stick (funny to some…) Here are a few snippets: One response to a classic Q&A (which yielded some great suggestions beyond the one I’m sharing): Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:32 am ((PDT)) Fellow urban farmers, Bindweed is slowly overtaking my garden.  Has anyone successfully eliminated it their garden and how did you do it? I’ve tried hand-weeding and (reluctantly) roundup, though neither with obsession, and my efforts did not even stop its spread. Please send me your advice if you’ve been able to get rid of it! The conversation evolved to include horsetail weed… My favorite response: Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:35 pm ((PDT)) I use psychological intimidation with my horsetail, and it’s worked! Every time I see a horsetail, I pick it, and I tell the plant that it has become a great delicacy and that every single one of its children will get picked and eaten. I make loud "nom"ing sounds. My garden, which used to be so rife with horsetail that I called the place Equisetum Acres, is almost horsetail free now. Passing along information from other sources, in this cases the West Seattle Tool Library (network weaving!)  *Power Tool Drag Races* You really haven’t lived a full life until you’ve witnessed The Power Tool Drag Races  that take place in Georgetown every year, hosted by The Hazard Factory.  It’s even better when you participate! This year’s races will take place on June 9th so we definitely need to get started "refurbishing" some of our otherwise inoperative tools in time for the competition.  If you’d like to help out and just stop to see the process, please either drop us a line (library@wstools.org) or stay tuned to the Tool Library Website or our Meetup Page for more details. And…  Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:00 pm ((PDT)) Anyone lose a goat? News flash from the City of Seattle: On April 20, the Seattle Animal Shelter received a call about a goat that had wandered into a woman’s house when she left her door open in the warm weather.  She went into her house to find the goat lying on her bed.  Animal Control Officers picked up the stray goat and brought him to the Shelter. The Shelter held the goat as a stray but no owner showed up to claim it, so it will be adopted by a farm outside Seattle. I have pics but they didn’t paste in-email me directly if you’d like to see.  The goat is white/gray with dark grey splotches and horns 6″ or longer. While us Seattlites would like to say "only in Seattle," what I observe are community indicators of a healthy community with both a thriving online and offline life. In this example, humor peppers the posts, and after a while, I can almost feel the smiles as I read. Now don’t mistake this for fluff. This community is very domain/content oriented. They are serious about raising food in an urban environment and taking care about how it is done. The humor is the warm part of this ‘electronic" communications. Offline the community is also very rich. There is of course, the warehouse where people buy their urban farming supplies where we get our chicken feed. There are the potlucks (almost always with homegrown, really great music) and swapmeets. There are volunteer opportunities (I’m manning a Coop booth this Sunday at a local plant sale.) What I sense is that  the "daily rhythm" of the community’s life is online on the email list. Lots of questions are answered — I have learned more about chicken health than I would ever have imagined! People are HELPFUL… ideas, borrowing tools, reusing materials that would have otherwise been thrown out but for that bit of electronic text communication. Sometimes there are dustups — usually around political or contentious issues. But they pass. What does it take? No mistake, there is an amazing volunteer leadership that carries the coop forward, because it is NOT a community that is all talk. There is a physical warehouse to be responsible for. There is stock. There are cash transactions. I bow down to that small but amazingly productive and passionate core — yes, another community indicator.  AND the vibrant voice of the wider community and periphery. I love communities and I enjoy observing and participating in their indicators. What are some of the indicators you are enjoying in your communities?

Well, since Stephen quotes me, and I’ve fully dived into Lisa Lane’s critique  (the real juice is in the comments) of the Curtis Bonk/Blackboard/Coursesite’s MOOC  "Instructional Ideas and Technology Tools for Online Success , I guess I had better blog my thoughts here on my own space. Please forgive the stream of conciousness, because if I take too much time to craft this, it won’t happen. Life and work is happening like a thundering curtain of water coming off of Victoria Falls. (Yes, my trip to Zambia is still strong in my memory!) This is a particularly fruitful time for  reflection because I’m working on three projects with aspirations to build capacity for facilitation of (mostly) online learning in some quite diverse contexts. Most of them have larger ambitious of scaling and becoming as much "network like" as much as smaller, bounded "community-like." Add to that the fact that there is such a streak of conversation, creative tension and interest as #Bonkopen (as us Twitterphiles know it) launches into its first full week, you know there is learning happening. For some, it is the eye-opening possibilities of scale, even if not fully realized (BonkOpen will see participation rates declined. I’m pretty sure of it.)  There is and will be gobs more of learning, even  if it is not the INTENDED learning.  More about that later! First, the quote from Stephen’s OLDaily. (Emphasis  mine.) Intro video for Curt Bonk’s ‘Blackboard MOOC’ (I wonder how much Blackboard itself is putting into this project). The level of support from his home institution makes me envious: "IU has been highly supportive. Last week, there is a university press release as well as an article in the student newspaper. And my instructional systems technology (IST) department had a short online news story as well." Not everybody is enthused, though. A comment to the Inside Higher Ed article points to "a long list of serious problems with Blackboard Course Sites that render it unusable for a MOOC" - there’s no blog subscription options, no profile pages for participants, and no blog comment notifications. As Nancy White says, "the design issue here is designing for a networked experience, not a group experience (which is foundational in a lot of Dr. Bonk’s work with a focus on community, etc.) Bb is not network centric." See also Sail’s Pedagogy, "blogging within an LMS is just wrong." And Lisa Lane writes, in "Leaving an open online class," that "it’s the same old Blackboard, with more white space, nicer fonts and some cool icons." Let’s pick apart some layers here. We certainly have a technological aspect which I’m going to studiously ignore because not only is it ginormous, but I want to focus on the process of design and facilitation in this post. So we’ll leave the tech elephant in the room for a later post. I’m sure I can take a technology stewardship lens to it! Curt Bonk has been an amazing practitioner and scholar of facilitating learning, particularly online learning. He has been a source of inspiration to me and many others. What I really REALLY want to learn from his MOOC is how to apply his ideas and theories to a networked learning experience vs a group learning experience. I want to learn and practice these skills not just because MOOCs are all the rage. (Don’t know what a MOOC is? A massively open online course — see more here.) My motivation is because much of the work I’m doing with distributed teams, communities of practices and networks find their ability to AMPLIFY what they learn and produce requires access to, and from,the  larger networks that contain their groups. The sort-of-obnoxious part of me wants to poke at this particular MOOC which is about using tools for online learning success, branding itself as a MOOC, trying to use this network-intentioned form to learn about practices that have essentially built on the bounded small group form learning  - the thing we often call "courses."  Does anyone else see the irony? Laura Gibbs, who I thankfully "met" in the introduction threads of BonkOpen (by posting with a provocative subject line instead of a traditional "intro" one - which would be pretty obnoxious in the old model, and effective in a networked context) wrote in the comments of Lisa’s blog: If Blackboard can make this massive class and call it a MOOC, very M and very C, while not having much O or O (is Blackboard really open? no; is Blackboard really online if it is so disconnected from the Internet itself?), then maybe even the term MOOC is in trouble. The less obnoxious part of me holds a great deal of compassion for the team, because this is really a huge, transformational leap and many of us are trying to make it. And personally, I’ve stumbled. A lot! The term MOOC IS challenging. The concept asks us to design and facilitate in ways that are different for most of us. When you are really good at doing it one way, going another is a huge shift. Not seeing that this is a new way, or worse, pretending that it is but acting on old models, is problematic. MOOCs have really forced me to stretch my mind and conceptions about what learning with and from each other  can and does mean. Even the word "course" is not big enough to hold these possibilities. While most of my practices is outside of academia, there is perhaps more alignment on the design and practice challenges with non-academic learning than ever before. Because life outside of academia is rarely about the course. It is about the learning we want and need. This resonates with the concept of MOOCs. I don’t think I’m the only one struggling to recoceptualize teaching, learning and facilitating in more open networked contexts. But we all sense something important here. Thus the huge interest. Bonnie Stewart wrote about this recently, when she noted the recent EdX announcement from MIT and Harvard universities in the US. Can "massive and open" acheive the scale and the flipping of the teaching and learning paradigm AND disperse the control that our traditional teaching institutions (and platform builders, etc. etc) have exerted on the process? The problem with EdX is that, scale and cost aside, it IS essentially a traditional learning model revamped for a new business era. It puts decision-making power, agency, and the right to determine what counts as knowledge pretty much straight back into the hands of gatekeeping institutions. MOOCs are about finding that cliff between structure and the unknown forward trajectory of each of us as learners. It is about sufficient constraints that create conditions not for necessarily uniform learning destinations for every learner, but for a learner to learn into his or her own learning possibilities around the subject at hand. This includes who they learn with and from, the range of supporting tools they choose to adopt (tech, content) , and the density of engagement with the material and other learners. If my hunch is right, this then asks us to seriously reconceptualize our facilitation and teaching frameworks. For me, as a facilitator, this has meant letting go of my deeply held belief that things START with socialization and relationship building. A simple example is "introduction threads" and "icebreakers" which we have used very successfully for building strong learning cohorts online — I’ve been doing it since 1997. These approaches are predicated on individual->group-> wider network trajectories. Steve Covello points out our past successful online learning experiences start with a profoundly human socialization and orientation which he is missing in BonkOpen (Again, from Lisa’s blog). …this environment is unintuitive to fundamental human experience. It is mediated through an interface. The interface offers **nothing analogous** to the social environment which it symbolizes. I cannot be more emphatic about how important a framework of social orientation is to online learners. It is as if the greater importance in the development of an LMS is the *information*, not the human. Yes, and…. MOOCs start at the network. Human intersections happen, but differently, mostly over dialog in synchronous and asynchronous contexts (chat room during a presentation, blog comments), facilitated by daily newsletters that scrape for a tag. Introductions in a cohort of 3000 is — well, ridiculous and we are crazy to ignore the fact. Creating subgroups is a strategy, but one that repeats the small group classroom model and that is what MOOCs are NOT. (At least this is my belief.) Relationships happen when we encounter another and try and understand their point of view, share ours, swap content, even crack a side joke and develop an affinity. Then, amongst all the waves of people and content, we start surfing the same breaks. We run into other sets of surfers that have emerged, and plenty of soloistas. Relationships then create nodes and bridges across the network. And that glue of bits of information with the shared tag facilitates. It is much less often that the "teacher" facilitates. And that, my friends, is a pretty dramatic reconceptualization. Again, Lisa Lane, from the comments of her post wrote (emphasis mine): The force of networked individualism is coming up against the bounded group(s) dictated (is that too strong a word?) by the Bb forums. One of the questions is what size group works? We have a small one here for an intense discussion, so we could argue "class sized" groups are better for focus. But networking is better for exploring. I just can’t figure out where Bb threaded discussions could fit into any of this? They worked in only a limited way in Moodle for the big MOOCs, and even there it was because the whole group didn’t participate. So is this an issue of size, or of a technology that simply cannot support a networked experience? This tension between the concepts of individual and group, of individual, group and collective (public) goods through learning is also tremendously juicy and challenging. Mama mia! This is not "peaches and sunshine" as it introduces potentially competing goals — certainly for institutions vis a vis their people formerly-known-as-students. Maybe we throw out the concept of group as we know it. And if you know me, this is a very radical thing for me to say. I hold small groups and communities as something sacred. AND, I am not suggesting they aren’t. But a MOOC perspective suggests we start at the individual and network intersection rather than small group. In my experience, we arrive back at the small groups, but in a way that is more firmly knitted back to the network — and that IS the value proposition. Hm, I buried that down here, didn’t I? So much for writing at 6am. So if we believe this is the direction that MOOCs are exploring, of networked learning, we also have to throw out a good bit of our past and previously very functional wisdom and practices. We have to reconceptualize the affordances — and this points strongly to the technology. Blackboard, for example, is not a networked affordance. Introduction threads are not networked affordances. Connections, text mining, and perhaps hardest to pin down, but for me at the deepest core, is reimagining what it means to build relationships and trust without our previously comfortable walls. Now we, as learners, both tear down and build up the walls. As if Jim Julius was reading my mind, he also posted in the comments on Lisa’s blog: So I wonder … has someone created a taxonomy of learning tools identifying their affordances and how well suited they are for networked learning designs vs. group-based learning? That would be interesting to consider … I’m interested, Jim! All in all, this  is pretty darned radical. And sometimes stressful. It turns  my hard earned practices and knowledge on their head VERY often. In fact, my gut instinct is we need to remove the word "course" from all of this. Find something to help us escape our past experiences and assumptions. Finally, as I work to curb my own snarkiness, I’m reminded of the importance of  cultivating sensitivity and compassion to productively learn from these opportunities. Again, from Steve in Lisa’s blog" My oversensitivity here, I hope, will serve as the moral equivalent of what Temple Grandin provides for the livestock industry. Her research into the sensitivities of animals in captive environments has lead to improvements in stress reduction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Grandin And yes, these experiments and conversations are heady and exciting with potential. And I’M ALL IN!

Well, radical may be an overstatement, but it is worth saying that we have solutions for many things in front of us, but we have old glasses on when we need new ones.  We love to protect the proverbial "elephant in the room" because after all, it is the elephant we know. But we consistently need to consider new perspectives. An "AND" perspective, not just an "OR." This challenges status quo, power dynamics and is sometimes just hard to wrap our head around, particularly when we feel we have some "expertise" and "skin in the game" in a situation. Last week I heard (and visually captured) CIAT’s Andy Jarvis give a great talk about the role of livestock in both feeding the world, and in green house gases.  On one hand, livestock is a critical food and economic staple for the very poor, especially those who own  a single cow or a few chickens. At the same time, livestock is implicated in large greenhouse gas contributions. So we have competing interests. Or do we? There is real potential that this is not simply an "OR" proposition if we look with those new lenses. For example, Andy shared some initial data about the blending of growing trees and cows (silvo-pastoral systems) which have been growing in importance in Central and South America. New lenses. Here is a snippet: Jarvis challenged those present at April’s meeting to look at the livestock ‘hoofprint’ as an opportunity as much as a call to immediate action. "Developing countries are where it’s at! They have the biggest potential for mitigation and major system transformations. There are systems which are far more efficient than others, and developing nations have the ability to put the rest of the world to shame." Intensive silvo-pastoral systems, for example, were highlighted as having catalyzed a mini-revolution in Colombia and Central America due to their high CO2 capture potential and low implementation costs.  According to Jarvis they are the rare climate change win-win, converting degraded pasture land into profitable, productive systems with high carbon stock, biodiversity, and resilience. via The elephant in the room - or is it a cow? | DAPA. See also a reframe on ILRI’s blog. Is it that simple? Certainly not. But the point is, we can’t look at greenhouse gases or food security as separate issues. They are connected. And that requires us to stretch the way we think and act. It requires a lot more "ANDs!" This theme of AND rather than OR is popping up in my work literally every day and with every piece of work. The process challenge it offers me is to really push how I design and facilitate for, and to, AND. Yeah, that’s a messy mouthful. This involves a) the ability to examine ideas and challenges from multiple perspectives, not just "critically from one approved perspective," b) the ability to deal more productively with power dynamics that sit behind the influence of expertise and funding, mostly through increased transparency, and c) building our tolerance for ambiguity along the path towards action decisions. The latter is greatly enhanced by understanding when to do small "safe fail" (a la Dave Snowden) experiments, when to do larger shifts where there is a bit more certainty, and where to scale the things we really know work across different settings. I think we confuse these all the time (at least in international development, it is a challenge!) In fact, this is not radical rethinking, folks. It is understanding how to agilely get out of our own thinking ruts, individually, organizationally and collectively. This has deep implications for our organizational structures and certainly for how we wield our power. I find it challenging (in a good way.) How about you? How are you working towards staying out of unproductive ruts?  

Appropos of almost nothing, I just have to point to this great painting by Charles Fancher, lawyer-slash-artist: Mediation: Hour 13. I’ve been in meetings like this. How about you? What are your own personal participant destressors in these meetings?

Choconancy1 posted a photo: Graphic recording of Stephanie West Allen's talk on Total Brain Medication at the NW Dispute Resolution Conf - May 2012

Last week my post on Reconceptualizing facilitation and participation in a networked (MOOC) context garnered some interesting attention and some great comments. I wanted to offer a few more links to other blogs which are part of this distributed conversation, not only because they are interested, but I’m interested in weaving together these threads, both between the #BonkOpen MOOC (Instructional Ideas and Technology Tools for Online Success) and the #Change11 MOOC. So here we go! Lisa Lane’s which I blogged about, but continues to have a great conversation thread. Willem van Valkenburg gathers a few links himself. Learning from Failure  from Kate in Australia. Bonk / Bb MOOC week 1: Motivation & Encouragement (?) and Questions About Network Learning (prompted by #bonkopen) from Jim Julius. (Jim, I owe you a comment!) Inside Higher ed on 4 Reasons Why the Bonk MOOC is So Interesting Ed Tech Dev What’s the "problem" with MOOCs? James Moore’s first week review of BonkOpen along with his related G+ stream Laura Gibbs has quite a few comments in her G+ stream as have  George Station, Phil Hill The Coursite’s team — platform sponsor of this MOOC - have been blogging about their experiences. Mass Education and Motivation on the Telic Blog. Haas Learning, Thoughts on the Curtis Bonk MOOC and Learning Management Systems Here are some more general MOOC-y blog posts: The Massive Open Online Professor (and I have to say, the term professor now feels odd to me!) from  Stephen Carson and Jan Philipp Schmidt Bonnie Stewart, the problem with EdX: a MOOC by any other name? Ignatia - Selecting meaningful #socialmedia tools for a #MOOC or #PLN (which goes to an ongoing conversation sprinkled here and there about how to steward technology in MOOCs, matching tools to activities, etc. )  Jonathan Rees - What’s the difference between a MOOC and the University of Phoenix? (this idea strikes fear into my heart…) #Change11 "One small step for man, a giant leap for mankind" - Is that the MOOC movement? from Sui Fai John Mak   Any other ones I should be reading and linking to? Edit: May 7 - here are some more! Gerry McKiernan maintains a blog titled _Alt-Ed_ that is "devoted to documenting significant initiatives relating to Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), digital badges, and similar alternative educational projects." http://alternative-educate.blogspot.com/ Scott Leslie tweeted this interesting First Monday article on "The internet, selective learning and the rise of issues specialists," noting the MOOC implications  

Are you stewarding technology for your community? Did you or are you considering a NING site? You may want to join in with CPSquare’s NING Stackathon. It will last for a year, but I suggest you get in on the ground floor now. John notes at the bottom that if you are willing to contribute a case, he will waive the (VERY MODEST) entry fee. Plus you get a six month CPSquare membership. Folks, JUMP on this! Here are the deets, via http://cpsquare.org/. Launching our Ning Stackathon By: John David Smith Hackathons are the current equivalent of a barn-raising, where people get together and work really hard for a short period of time on a fun project that somehow contributes to the common good.  We’ve used barn-raising as examples of the kind of personal, skin-in-the-game generosity that’s involved in communities of practice. We’re inventing a new portmanteau.  A Stackathon is working party that’s slower-paced than a hackathon and more reflective.  It gathers useful examples of something with a lot of sense-making built into the process.  Therefore a stackathon is not like the current craze for content curation.  Read on for details about CPsquare’s first Stackathon. During this stackathon we’ll gather profiles and portraits of as many living Ning-based or Ning-supported communities as possible.  We’ve started developing a list of interesting examples.  As we stack these communities one on top of another, we expect to discover new hacks that could make any of them more effective, sustainable, and fun. (And those hacks are probably relevant to simpler or more elaborate platforms than Ning, too!) We will try to be somewhat systematic in describing how Ning is configured for each community and how it fits in the community’s digital habitat. We’ll pay attention to the ongoing role of leadership, facilitation, and technology stewardship. That means understanding what the community is about, what kinds of activities are typical, and what other tools a community uses in each community. Understanding that would give us a better idea of how and when to recommend Ning. Our stack will also suggest many possible methods that one community could borrow from another (including the use of auxiliary tools, plug-ins, themes, membership restrictions, etc., etc.). During the stackathon (which will run for a whole year, from March 2012 to April 2013) we’ll have discussions in CPsquare’s Web Crossing site (password required: it’s for CPsquare members and people registered for the Stackathon), we’ll collect ideas in various Google Docs, we may have teleconferences, and we will collect some of our insights on CPsquare’s Media Wiki site. It all depends on what people want to do and are willing to do. You can participate in the stackathon by joining CPsquare or by registering for the Stackathon here (costs $10). Any Stackathon registrant who contributes a full community portrait gets their registration fee refunded and they receive a CPsquare membership during the last 6-months of the Ning Stackathon. (Thanks to Amboo Who for the photo!)