Ideation
MEthods:
|
Reflection using Green light, yellow light, red light
Green light - what worked well The progression of the Methods Today moved us forward so quickly. Looking through the Filed Guide to Human Design, it was difficult to image that we would get through so many of the methods in such a short period of time. My Green Light is the controlled structure that works so well, without needing to control the content. The methods guided us toward (and maybe back around to) our initial problem: "How can we encourage youth initiated community experiences?" We moved from coming back from the Field with a lot of new information, insights and questions. Our Ideation Process moved from this large amount of data through 5 Top Statements, Insight Statements, Top 3 Insight Statements, "How might we...?" questions, Bundling and Prototyping in one day. By enforcing efficiency and deliberate decision making, the process moves quickly. Instead of leaving the 50 or so Post -It Notes there for people to discuss and debate, progressively bundling, categorizing, defining and prioritizing the information on the Post-Its facilitates group focus and puts the focus more on consensus building than debating. I liked how this worked in practice. Application to my work I am trying to find a place for this process in my class. I have the preservice teachers bring in one case study from their week each seminar. Perhaps we could use the situations in class to Brainstorm, Bundle and "How Might We...?" solutions to common challenges? This would help push the preservice teacher to support each other, build shared praxis at the beginning of the year, but also to always seek solutions. By engaging them in critical thinking with others, I would be providing them important tools for their practice, while modelling how that looks in practice, which is how I like to design all of my lessons. creating insight statementsRed light - What did not work well
Brainstorm The Brainstorming step was an interesting activity for us as a group. I think I understand the intentionality of the rotating and taking turns in order of the number we were assigned within our group, and need to inquire what the purpose was. I believe it was to:
#3 - Build on the ideas of others - the contributors did not take time to process the ideas going up. The contributors expanded on their own ideas, creating a vertical ideation, but not a horizontal ideation. #5 - one conversation at a time - there were a few voices doing the talking and a few voices not talking. Because some of the group were standing at the paper, adding ideas, there was a physical block to discussion and conversation. These results, after the open collaboration we had been so aware of, made the physical structure of communication that much more obvious to me. It also made me consider how often we revisit conversations about the flattening of our environment. People tend to revert to their comfort zone, and I would imagine this would be an activity that would need to be reintroduced on occasion. Application to my work: In my own work, I think it will be important to ensure that I observe the students and intermingle with them as they collaborate to note inherent tendencies my students have. Because I have them for longer than a one week period, I can plan for ongoing flattening activities. Reflecting on our faculty, we have a very democratic group and I believe we all contribute and ‘debate’ numerous aspects of an issue, challenge or initiative. We continue to bring our discussions back to the larger goal and the process we have agreed upon when working through issues, and it has seemed to work well for us so far. We have hired quite a few new faculty and sessionals, and it will be important to remember that we need to provide opportunity to have status-less discussions that invite contribution and evaluation, and that we commit to the pre-agreed upon method of doing so. If we find we need a change, it might be best to either democratize the decision or revisit the issue after the fact. top 5 statementsYellow light - What could have worked better "How might we… ?" I didn’t find our group returned from the Brainstorm as open and flat as we had been working. When we had divergence in the Design Problem articulation on Monday, we were still open to hearing other ideas, and putting them on the table, even though we (collectively as a group) did not readily embrace the same direction. I felt there was a need to clear the fog and find the common ground when we engaged in ‘debating’ the focus, which would happen when we found the right language to merge the 2 ideas. When we got to our ‘How might we’, we would have benefited from reviewing the principles in Brainstorming, as we were off track and not engaging in Ideation. We needed to defer judgement, stay focused on the topic and have one conversation at a time. Because of these missteps, we were less efficient, and less inclusive than we have been. Application to my work: ‘How might we’ reminded me that we need to be thinking about the audience. In our project, the audience is the teen, and our problem is finding out if they have any interest in initiating activities of interest to them when they have unstructured time. ‘How might we’ … support others… provide opportunity…. find out more …. I think through the possibilities as a facilitator. When I think ‘How do I…?”, I am focusing on myself as the initiator and do-er. It reminds me how powerful our choice of words are. I have the pre-service teachers bring in case studies every week, and we explore a variety of questions around the event they choose. I am going to revisit the language that I have in that template to reflect on how I am expecting the preservice teachers to consider a problem. I also think it would be valuable for me to sit down with a few partner teachers and read the language used in their handbook and evaluation practices - are our requirements and communication about their role as a partner in the development of a preservice teacher clear? Or are we sending weak signals and asking the wrong guiding questions? How MIght We ...?
|
The world cannot respond to you if you don't give feedback - Ian prinsloo |
[Untitled. spotlight on floor, bw]. Retrieved July 28, 2015 from http://www.fruitofthespirittheater.com