Jill's Resource Blog

Home » Resource Journal » Engagement Techniques – PIDP3250

Engagement Techniques – PIDP3250

Early Reflections – Margaret Wheatley and  Heutagogy:

“We have known for nearly half a century that self-managed teams are far more productive than any other forms of organizing. There is a clear correlation between participation and productivity; in fact productivity gains in truly self managed work environments are at a minimum 35% higher than in traditionally managed organizations. (Wheatley, 1997)

My interpretations:

Margaret Wheatley is talking about leadership in organizations and managing change but it isn’t too much of a stretch to replace organizations with higher education and self managed teams as self managed students. According to Wheatley’s explanation of systems, the system self organizes, the instructor and students develop shared understanding of what’s important, recognize what’s acceptable learning, and define the learning that is required and what the actual assessment of learning looks like. As this system develops, new capacities will emerge from learning together (Wheatley, 1997).

Learning Styles Out – Preference and Meaning Making In

When learning and personal development are integrated, the cognitive and affective dimensions are seen as one process, and the hallmark of a successful educational experience is when increased cognitive understanding is complemented by increased sense of self, personal maturity and interpersonal effectivess” (King & Baxter Magolda, 1996, p. 163).

My interpretation:

The concept of learning styles being a myth is quite frankly, shocking to me.  I have lived the majority of my adult life believing certain styles enhance my learning…..that being said, I can easily see that replacing styles with preferences is not a significant leap of faith.  Preferences built on individual meaning reflects this quote and the complimentary nature of cognitive understanding and sense of self…and speaks to that “mssing link” that brings engagement to the learner and the learning.

Reference:

King, P. & Baxter Magolda, M. (1996) A developmental perspective on learning.  Journal  of College Student Development, 37, 163 – 173.

Wheatley, M. (1997). Goodbye Command and Control. Leader to Leader Institute, #5 (summer 1997).

THE SIX TYPES OF SOCRATIC QUESTIONS

1. Questions for clarification:
  • Why do you say that?
  • How does this relate to our discussion?
  • “Are you going to include diffusion in your mole balance equations?”
2. Questions that probe assumptions:
  • What could we assume instead?
  • How can you verify or disapprove that assumption?
  • “Why are neglecting radial diffusion and including only axial diffusion?”
3. Questions that probe reasons and evidence:
  • What would be an example?
  • What is….analogous to?
  • What do you think causes to happen…? Why:?
  • “Do you think that diffusion is responsible for the lower conversion?”
4. Questions about Viewpoints and Perspectives:
  • What would be an alternative?
  • What is another way to look at it?
  • Would you explain why it is necessary or beneficial, and who benefits?
  • Why is the best?
  • What are the strengths and weaknesses of…?
  • How are…and …similar?
  • What is a counterargument for…?
  • “With all the bends in the pipe, from an industrial/practical standpoint, do you think diffusion will affect the conversion?”
5. Questions that probe implications and consequences:
  • What generalizations can you make?
  • What are the consequences of that assumption?
  • What are you implying?
  • How does…affect…?
  • How does…tie in with what we learned before?
  • “How would our results be affected if neglected diffusion?”
6. Questions about the question:
  • What was the point of this question?
  • Why do you think I asked this question?
  • What does…mean?
  • How does…apply to everyday life?
  • “Why do you think diffusion is important?”

Source: http://www.umich.edu/~elements/5e/probsolv/strategy/cthinking.htm

 

 

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: