Invention Sessions vs. Personal Learning Communities
Ed. Tech., Web 2.0, learning June 23rd, 2008
Recently, on Darren Draper’s blog, I commented on the sort of “invention sessions” that Malcolm Gladwell wrote about and that Darren suggested would be an interesting addition to the field of education (I agree completely, BTW). I wrote: “I wonder if electronic communities are sufficient. Classroom 2.0 is a wonderful resource, but do ‘invention sessions’ necessarily require prolonged f-2-f interactions among a small group of smart people? I think this is an empirical question.”
In response to my comment, Darren wrote, “Strange, but you’re right about the f2f interactions. There is something about having a face to face relationship with someone - and the power that comes from bringing it to online settings. It’s as if one without the other isn’t quite as effective. I know that as I’ve met people f2f, our interactions online become more rich…That said, I think many would argue that f2f interactions aren’t required for effective ‘invention sessions’. This topic needs to be addressed further.”
I henceforth address the topic further, and I respectfully disagree (though maybe it’s just a matter of how we interpret Gladwell’s writing about invention sessions). Please don’t get me wrong…I think there are incredible opportunities and ideas to be pursued through the use of networking sites such as Ning, and the learning opportunities afforded by the combination of networking tools such as Ning, Twitter, UStream, Elluminate, etc. are endless.
However, I think what we are doing by collectively using those applications is creating individualized yet overlapping learning communities. And, with NECC 2008 approaching, I will meet (with) many of those within my learning community and add face-to-face communication to that community. I believe this is ideal for two reasons. First, my own learning is aided because growing evidence suggests that e-learning is best when supplemented with f-2-f interactions (i.e. “blended” learning). Second, as I’ve written about before, based on the work of Etzioni and Etzioni (THE experts on “community”), the ideal form of community is a hybrid one. Communities that utilize hybrid systems “would be able to bond better
and share values more effectively than communities that rely upon only one or the other mode of communication” (Etzioni & Etzioni, 1999, p. 247). Thus, adding Web 2.0 tools to traditional learning spaces such as presentations, conferences, etc. creates perfect personal learning communities; the learning is better and the community is better. PLN/PLE + F-2-F = PLC [NOTE: I believe the PERSONAL learning community is distinguishable from the PROFESSIONAL learning community made famous and popularized by Rick DuFour and others. But, that's the subject of another blog post...].
However, I understood the “invention session” to be an action/change-oriented, synchronous interaction between a small group of really smart individuals with very different personal and/or professional perspectives. I suspect that those in the sessions of which Gladwell wrote extended their discussions with computer-mediated communications (CMC), but I think the initial brainstorming needed to be done together, in the same room at the same time for an extended period of time. I’m as much an advocate of CMC as anyone, but things happen f-2-f that cannot be replicated digitally. I also think the action orientation of invention sessions necessitates limiting the number of participants. If you’ve ever chaired a committee or a task force, you can probably appreciate such a limitation.
If someone can offer an example of a major “invention” or “innovation” that was developed purely through CMC among a large group of individuals, I’d be willing to reconsider my argument. Until then, I throw out two questions:
- What do you think? Can an invention session be held solely online?
- If there were to be an invention session to. let’s say, eliminate the achievement gap, which 5-7 living individuals would you want to be involved?
Tags: education, Gladwell, invention session, learning, necc2008, networks, PLC
Great topic.
I have found that some of the Elluminate sessions that I have held which were set up for the purpose of brainstorming have been extremely effective at producing creative outcomes.
In fact, some of my thinking about innovation have come from these experiences. I think I was surprised at how effective a real-time, “web meeting” could be. I think it’s been a combination of having a platform that approximates physical closeness but also allows for more “egalitarian” discussion (voice + chat makes it easier to actually bring up an idea)–and promoting the idea of seeking for brainstormed outcomes from the meeting.
Steve
Interesting, Steve. I’ve had mixed experiences with real-time web meetings and I think much of that variation is due to the number of participants. Also, the success seems to depend on how the “meeting” is structured. With many participants, voice+chat can get a little overwhelming (at least for me). The conversations get all miscellaneous, which is not always bad, but sometimes problematic. Also, there have been times when I want to “speak up” but can’t read others body language to know if it’s an appropriate time to do so. Maybe that will come with time and even more experience with computer-mediated communities. I do also like your use of the word “egalitarian;” I think that’s am important idea for any kind of invention session. I think everyone needs to feel like they are on equal grounds and there’s no one “dominant” figure. In any event, I think there’s some good, deep thinking that needs to be done about online communities relative to f-2-f ones and hybrid ones. I know there’s some good research to be done…now if I can just find one willing doctoral candidate…
Fantastic post, Jon, discussing ideas not new to the field of online learning. While the majority would likely agree with you (in stating that invention sessions require a face-to-face component), recent improvements in social networking and online tools have come together to persuade me into a greater appreciation for online interactions – and even such interactions that lack a face-to-face component.
In addition to the format changes and directions taken in relation to NECC Unplugged (to which I think Steve has alluded in his comment above - and which is an invention in and of itself, evolving without the luxury of face-to-face interaction), I think OpenPD is a second example of an invention that has come about through completely online interactions. With OpenPD, we’ve shown that a wiki can be used as “classroom”. We’ve also shown that people can come together for a learning experience (previously called “class”), create products, and learn together without ever meeting face-to-face. In fact, Robin Ellis and I have taught 3 classes together and given three conference presentations together – and we’ve never met face-to-face.
Thus, my PLC includes a number of people whom I have yet to meet face-to-face. Would our relationships improve with face-to-face interaction? Most likely. Nevertheless, I can’t deny the richness of the relationships I’ve been able to develop without such a luxury.
As a side-note, if you were to find a doctoral candidate willing to pursue this further, what research questions would you particularly have in mind?
Jon, first, hello from Fredericksburg, and from someone who earned an M.Ed. from VCU in Instructional Tech before there was truly such a program:) I am going to be involved in Will Richardson’s and Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach’s Powerful Learning Practice next year (here at FA). I look forward to our f2f meeting in September to kick it off. The rest of the year, we will be engaged in synchronous and asynchronous learning, but our initial meeting will set the tone and help us form relationships. I believe it matters.
@Darren - I have to learn more about OpenPD. Re: research questions…most of the research I’ve read about online learning has been of the sort where the same “course” is taught online and f-2-f and outcomes are compared across the two groups. I think there are lots of problems with those studies. I could imagine a good action research project where a group of educators within a school or district engage in a reform effort of some kind by engaging in purely online “invention sessions” and the researcher documents participants’ reactions, feelings, etc. about the process. The study would be guided by a question about the viability of Web-based invention sessions. I’d have to think it through a bit more…
@Susan - hello in Fredericksburg! I have a few doc. students from Spotsy county, so I’m learning more and more about your neck of the woods. I didn’t even know that VCU offers a post-bac. certificate in Instructional Tech. until looking it up after your comment. I have to find out who runs that program since I’m finding the School of Ed. faculty woefully low tech.
And, I’m just now learning about Sheryl and Will’s PLN program. VERY interesting.
Thanks for stopping by and we’ll have to meet somewhere soon!
OpenPD began with this post:
http://drapestakes.blogspot.com/2007/09/open-professional-development-whole-new.html
Culminated with this site (our class):
http://openpd.wikispaces.com/
And a number of posts that I have written describing our efforts can be read here:
http://drapestakes.blogspot.com/search/label/openpd
Also, if you’re really serious about learning more about OpenPD, check out the video we created to describe the what and why behind it. By the way, I’ve never met most of the people in the video, either - and yet we were able to throw it all together in less than 24 hours.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0qsdzxz0UM
Thanks for those resources, Darren. I’ll certainly peruse.
If I had read this post a year ago I would have agreed with you that face to face “invention sessions” necessary for success of the invention. But in the last year my experience in co teaching OpenPD with Darren Draper has completely changed my thoughts on this. As Darren said in his response we have been successful with OpenPD and we were able to plan, organize, brainstorm and create our professional development sessions only through the use of CMC. I also believe face to face is important and can add a richness to the relationships, whichever comes first.