Who are we and how did we support this work?
Making Visible Developing Process of Design, Instruction and Student Learning
Our Embedded Interactional Ethnography Team
Center for Literacy & Inquiry in Networking Communities at UC, Santa Barbara
Monaliza Chian
Judith Green
Ethny Stewart
Daisy Dai
Engaging in ongoing interactional ethnographic research with our CSU East Bay
LTFT Colleagues, who wanted to make visible the layers of work as it was
developing
PI Stephanie Couch
Instructor and Designer, Lonny Avi Brooks
Consultant, Andrea Saveri
Project Director (initial) Azure J Stewart
Beth Yeager, Senior Researcher,
Guiding Questions Guiding
Interactional Ethnographic Research With LTFT Team
 How, and in what ways, did this grounded and recursive approach support Dr.
Brooks with Andrea Saveri in engaging students in developing understandings
of both organizational communication theories, and in long term and futures
thinking processes and practices in relationship to societal collapse and
organizational development?
 What time frames, instructional experiences and resources were needed for
students to achieve a mastery level of both Communication theory and
practice and long term and futures thinking processes?
 What constructs were central to locating evidence of student learning of both
organizational theory and long term and futures thinking?
What We Explored:
Uncovering the Layers of Work of the Instructor and Design Team
Ongoing dialogues with the instructor, PI, Andrea Saveri and the project team
Archived laid a foundation for analysis of the multiple layers of work undertaken to
to uncover (make transparent):
•
Historical, institutional and social contexts framing the instructional process
•
Team members and their roles, relationships and contributions
•
The resources developed to introduce students to key constructs (e.g., pace
layers, forecasting, societal collapse, cone of uncertainty, among others).
•
The cycles of design and development necessary to construct the Spring 2014
course
•
How the learning objectives of the course were designed to meet the
Institutional Learning Outcomes for Education (ILOS) of the CSU East Bay
Curriculum.
What we learned from our research:
Creating a (re)presentation of the
complex work of the LTFT team
Interactively Researching an Iterative
Recursive, and Dialogic Ongoing Process
From Design to Action in and
Across Courses
Axes of Development
Inter-relating LTFT ways of thinking with
Organizational Theory ways of thinking
in and across Particular Courses
What counts as mastery and how is it achieved
across courses, time and conceptual
development -- Communication BA requirements
LTFT Pilot Instructor &
Design Team
CSUEB
Organizational Communication Students
Adapted from conceptual work of Dr. Melinda Kalainoff, Academy Professor, US Miltary Academy: West
Elements of the Design-Spring 2014
Flows
of
Conduct
Week
1
Week
2
View image
of pace layers
and video clip
of Brand
explaining the
meaning of
the layer
Read 2
Chapters
of
Diamond’
s Collapse
Reading and
Simulating
the Creative
Fire (Ruby’s
Song): role
playing
exercises
based on the
novel in most
class sessions
Role-play exercises will be done in most classes
Group color
selection
Week Week Week Week Week
3
4
5
6
7
Week 8
Norse Society structure vs. Inuit as a case study
Continue discussions of
Creative Fire and what
would each color team
would want to preserve
from their society (from
the perspective of their
color) to survive across
millennia.
Examine how the Long
Now Foundation as an
organization is dedicated
to cultivating deep time
thinking
Week
9
Week
10
Begin
Sharing
Present
ation
based
on the
Final
Paper
Finals
Week
Weekly Focus with Extended Interactional Space
Date
Topic
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 7
Week 8
Week 9
Week 10
4/3/14
4/10/14
4/17/1
4
4/24/14
5/1/14
5/8/14
5/15/14
5/22/14
5/29/14
6/5/14
Reframing
Getting
Organizatio organized
ns &
Societies
Discussion Board 1
Due Date: April 16, 201411:59
Groups People and Investing
Inter
Power, Manager
and Organizations in Human personal Conflict
as
Teams
Resources
and
and
Politician
Group Coalition
Dynamics
Journal Entries
Due Date
April 30, 2014
Discussion Board 2
Due Date: May 7, 201411:59
Political Organizations
Arenas, as Cultures
Political and Theater
Agents
Discussion Board 3
Due Date: May 21, 2014
11:59
Looking Closely
at the
Discussion
between
the Professor and the Students via Online
Blackboard
Mastery-K(4)
The collapse of the Norse was
an event that had multiple
factors involved, and three
pace layers can be applied. To
begin the pace layers that I am
choosing to apply are nature,
culture and infrastructure.
Lonny Response to K(4) Developing-A(3)
Very well stated! Good
work Kristela!
Now, how did the Norse
organize themselves and
their Christian society to
respond to internal and
external threats? How
would one of
When it comes to the
infrastructure we see how the Mintzberg's structures
Norse (poorly) ran their villages apply here? How would
because they were very hostile Theory X or Theory Y
apply here? Let me know
towards their neighbors and
rather than building bridges
in the next assignment.
with the Inuit whom they
How were the Inuit
could've traded supplies and
innovative? See pp. 244goods with, they brutally
250 in Jared Diamond's
murdered them. I think this
book Collapse on PDF.
was detrimental to their
See the folder on course
demise because them coming
materials Discussion
in to a land that they were
Board 2 resources. Go
unsure how to utilize due to
into more detail about
the different weather than
Norse and Inuit
what they were used to in
Iceland, they could have asked organizational culture.
or worked with the natives to See my emailed
learn of ways to better use the announcement about
land as opposed to overusing
extra credit on this
what they had and slowly
assignment.
killing what little they had to
work with.
When looking back at the
collapse of the Greenland Norse
civilization it is hard to pin point a
certain pace layer that played the
biggest role in the demise of the
Norse other than Mother Nature
herself. Nature is a very powerful
force that can destroy, revive or
create life in many ways. Nature
can be slow and deliberate or
quick and immediate. Two of the
five factors listed in Jared
Diamond’s book Collapse deal
directly with nature.
Lonny Response to A(3)
Be more specific. What changed in
nature exactly? Which trading
partners? What types of fish were
taboo? Now I would like you to apply a
multiframe approach to this case study
and provide more detail and bring in
contemporary and future
organizational comparisons. See my
recent emailed announcement about
this. How did the Norse organize
themselves and their Christian society
to respond to internal and external
The first of the two factors that
threats? How would one of Mintzberg's
Jared Diamond writes about is
structures apply here? How would
environmental degradation and
Theory X or Theory Y apply here? Let
the second most influential
me know in the next assignment How
factor was climate change.
were the Inuit innovative? See pp. 244These changes were both slow in 250 in Jared Diamond's book Collapse
their maturation but overtime
on PDF. See the folder on course
played the biggest role. The role
materials Discussion Board 2 resources.
they played was changing the
landscape the Norse people lived Go into more detail about Norse and
on and adjusting the amount of
Inuit organizational culture.
resources available to them.
See my emailed announcement about
extra credit present and future
organizational comparisons on this
assignment.
Inclusions of Key Concepts
Framework
Key
Concepts
Jared Daimond
Five point Societal Collapse
Stewart Brand
Pace Layers
Bolman and
Deal
Organizationa
l
Theory
Structural
Human Resources
Discussion Board 1 Discussion Board 2
Discussion Board 3
Mastery
1
Mastery
1
Developing Mastery
3
Political
Symbolic
Nature
Culture
Governance
Infrastructure
Commerce
Fashion
Hostile neighbors
1
4
Developing
4
3
5
3
1
1
5
3
5
1
4
Developing
1
2
2
1
2
4
1
4
3
4
1
1
4
3
1
2
Un-friendly trading
partners
1
1
Environmental damage
2
1
Climate change
Society’s response to
environmental change
2
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
5
2
Contrastive Analysis of Two
Communication BA Students
Mastery
•Provides detailed evidence via APA citation
•Shows a good grasp of the concepts
•Demonstrates knowledge of LTFT concepts,
pace layers and/or other ideas defined and
explained
•Demonstrates knowledge of core course
content based on the main org comm text
for the course
•Grammar and spelling errors are minimal
Developing Mastery
•Provides adequate evidence via APA
citation
•Shows a sufficient grasp of the concepts
•Demonstrates some knowledge of LTFT
concepts, some aspects of pace layers
and/or other ideas require more explanation.
•Demonstrates some knowledge of core
course content based on the main
organizational communication text for the
course
•Grammar and spelling errors are minimal
but enough that at times disrupts the flow of
the essay
Leading a Learning Model As an Embedded Ethnographer
Creating an Iterative, Recursive and Forward Looking Process to Support a “New” Learning Initiative
Preparing a Collective Mind-for-Action
Engaging informed others in formulating,
examining
and reformulating potential designs and actions
Instructor and design team partner(s)
reformulating opportunities for developing
particular concepts of Organization
Communication Theory in relation to LTFT
Ongoing collecting of empirical
records on what was happening
Thinking iteratively and recursively in
the moment AND being forward looking
In a “start-up” the ability to collect data,
explore/analyze with others, reformulate and
support new directions is fundamental
Going Public with students and with
advisory and ethnographic partners
Constructed with the assistance of Dr. Stephanie Couch, Executive Director Institute for STEM Education, CSU East Bay