All posts by Isabeau Iqbal

Liberating structures

LiberatingStructures-jewels

I recently had the pleasure of participating in a Liberating Structures workshop in Vancouver. Liberating structures can be defined as “microstructures that make it quick and simple for groups of people of any size to radically improve how they interact and work together” (Lipmanowicz & McCandless, 2013, p. 21). At the core of Liberating Structures’ philosophy is the idea that small and simple shifts in our routine interactions can make it possible for everyone to be included and engaged.

During the 2 1/2 day workshop, I tried out a variety of approaches that I can use in my facilitation, teaching, small group interactions, and individual activities. Several of the approaches were new, while others I had encountered before –usually, in a slightly different way than they were presented at the immersion workshop (see here for full description of all the miscrostructures).

I have been thinking about what made some of the microstructures feel more purposeful at the immersion workshop as compared to in other settings where I have used and/or encountered them (or variations of).  I’ll use 1-2-4-all as an example because of it’s likeness to think-pair-share as I think about the differences and similarities:

  • The invitation: During the LS workshop, participants were encouraged to pay close attention to the invitation (one of the 5 design elements in all the microstructures). Though the invitation in think-pair-share is just as important as in 1-2-4 all, I have tended to create the wording ‘on the fly’.  I have typically used “Reflect on…”, “On your own, think about…”. Now I am paying more attention to how I choose my words for even a ‘simple’ activity and writing these out before hand.
  • Purpose: The invitation (and all other design elements) are closely linked to purpose. The importance of purpose has always been top of mind, and the point was made over and over during the workshop.
  • Sharing in foursomes: In think-pair-share, I sometimes ask pairs to join and discuss in fours before we begin to report out in the large group.  In 1-2-4-all, the foursome piece is key to the activity because the purpose of this activity is to provide a venue for expressing thoughts, gathering diversity of input and building meaning-making among the group.  When doing 1-2-all, and the foursome piece is left out, I think there is less opportunity to achieve the purposes described previously.
  •  Sharing an important/valuable/worthwhile idea to the large group: What made this step most useful for me was that our facilitator instructed (“invited”) us to consider and come to some agreement (as a foursome) on: “What is one idea that stood out in your conversation?” He also suggested that only those ideas that were important and valuable to the whole group be shared with the whole group. In doing so, he made me think carefully about what I wanted to share and why.

Thank you to Leva Lee and Tracy Kelly from BC Campus‘s Professional Learning, UBC CTLT and others who organized this worthwhile event!  See here  for two related posts on Liberating Structures by Tracy Kelly.

Teaching and learning inventories

Photo by inthepotter’shands

I am currently reading the second edition of Maryellen Weimer‘s excellent book titled “Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice“.

In it, she refers readers to a number of inventories relevant to post-secondary teaching and learning (many of these I have not heard of and would like to follow up on). Here is a list of all those she has written about up to page 158 (that is as far as I’ve gotten in the book), with links to some further information.

Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) -self-report instrument designed to measure students’ motivational orientations and their use of different learning strategies. (p.35 in Weimer’s book). See here for more information.  And/or, see here for article by Pintrich & De Groot.

Revised Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) – assesses students’ deep and surface approaches to learning. (p. 32 in Weimer’s book). See here for article by Biggs, Kember, and Leung (scroll to page 19 for questionnaire)

Approaches to Teaching Inventory – provides insight into how academics approach their teaching (p.32 in Weimer’s book). See here (PDF).

Classroom Climate Inventory – gives instructors input on the actual climate within a class in order to evaluate how conducive that atmosphere is to learning. (p.147-148 Weimer’s book). See here (Word version of inventory can be downloaded).

Autonomous Learning Survey – short survey that helps students assess themselves as autonomous (or dependent) learners.  (p.150 Weimer’s book) See here for a Faculty Focus piece with the inventory.

 

Please email me at isabeau.iqbal(at)ubc.ca or send me a tweet @isabeauiqbal if you have more I can add to this list!

 

Becoming better listeners

listen to me...


I recently read the textbook Communicating Mindfully by Dr. Dan Huston (@huston_dan) who has written a practical  resource for instructors in post-secondary education.  Though I was drawn to many ideas throughout the book, in this post I consider those from Becoming Better Listeners (Chapter 3) because of their relevance to the work I do with the Formative Peer Review of Teaching Program and in my other educational development work.

Why is active listening so rare in our lives?

Huston suggests that one of the main reasons active listening (sometimes called deep listening) is so rare in our lives is because of our wandering minds, which entertain regularly changing thoughts. Given that we typically function at high speed and on a tight schedule, efficiency is our priority. As such, we often allot a set time to conversations; this does not create the spaciousness needed for active listening. I have only to think about my Outlook calendar and typical work week: all my meetings (which are, in effect, discussions and/or conversations of one sort or another) have pre-determined start and end times.

Behaviours that interfere with active listening

In contexts where we do not create spaciousness for conversations, we may behave in ways that interfere with active listening. Such behaviours include:

  • denying how the other person is feeling
  • interrogating (e.g., “didn’t I tell you not to…?”)
  • giving unwanted advice and/or psychological opinions
  • asking questions that pull the speaker away from what they are trying to stay (i.e., steering the conversation in the direction we want)
  • blaming the person (‘x happened because you left things to the last minute’)

Huston notes that the above list has been adapted from Rebecca Shafir’s book The Zen of Listening: Mindful Communication in the Age of Distraction (p.123-129.)

Self-awareness improves deep listening

Though Huston recognizes that some of the behaviours above may be appropriate in specific conditions (e.g., asking questions to get someone back on a topic), he points out that it is our impatience which often leads to the interfering behaviours. This resonated with me. Huston suggests that when we feel strong emotions, such as impatience, as we are listening, we can learn to observe the emotions in our brains and body. Though it seems paradoxical, we can become better listeners when we are more self-aware. This sort of mindfulness recognizes that we cannot predict or necessarily choose how we are going to feel in a conversation, yet it can help us be more attentive to the present moment. By making “empathy a higher priority than getting things done quickly” (p.64), we can become better listeners. That empathy needs to be directed towards the conversation partner and towards ourselves when we experience emotions, as listeners, that make us potentially less skillful listeners.

Interested in practicing mindfulness and/or using it in your teaching or educational development practice?

Huston provides many do-able mindfulness exercises throughout his book (and he counters the fear that practicing mindfulness means having to do everything at “a snail’s pace”). These exercises can be applied in teaching and/or in non-teaching contexts.  The web also has countless sites with suggestions, and recordings, etc. See, for example:

 

Teamwork: Reciprocal helping relationships

 

“The essence of teamwork is the development and maintenance of reciprocal helping relationships among all the members”*

In my third post on the topic of helping, I consider teamwork as a helping relationship (see here for my first and second posts). Below are  some notes/quotes/ideas on teamwork from Chapter 7 of Schein’s book ““Helping: How to offer, give and receive help”.

Teamwork as perpetual reciprocal helping (title of Chapter 7)

Early on in his book, Schein refers to teamwork as ‘perpetual reciprocal helping’ and the phrase stuck with me because it offered an interesting perspective on this word and concept. Traditional definitions of teamwork, such as the one found at Merriam-Webster online, go something like this: “work done by several associates with each doing a part but all subordinating personal prominence to the efficiency of the whole.” Unlike this definition, Schein’s emphasizes trust and exchange, which I believe are important.

https://flic.kr/p/ozLoE

About subordination, Schein notes that teams work best when the higher status person exhibits some humility, and “acknowledges that others are crucial to good outcomes”. Thus, for effective team functioning, the higher status team member should create space for other members to develop identities and roles that feel equitable within the context of that group.  One way of doing this is by taking on the process consultant role and helping members figure out responses to the following issues:

  1. Who am I to be? What is my role in this group?
  2. How much control/influence will I have in this group?
  3. Will my goals/need be met in this group?
  4. What will be the level of intimacy in this group? (p.109)

He rightly notes that members should not strive for equal status and rank within the group. Rather, teammates should strive to be comfortable with the status that corresponds with their role.  The goal is mutual acceptance because that is essential to the development of the trust, which is needed to sustain group performance. “Effective teams do not have to be love-ins, but members must know each other well enough as fellow team members to be able to trust them to play their roles in the accomplishment of the group’s task.” (Schein, 2009, p.111).

The previous quote resonated with me because I used to think that even workload distribution was an essential feature of good teamwork. However, as I think back to my experiences of teamwork and collaboration, clarity of role expectations has been a much more important factor. Effective teamwork happens when people understand, agree upon, and stick to, their roles.  

Clearly, good teamwork needs more than clarity around role expectation; however, this is a piece I plan to pay more attention to  in future collaborations.

*(Schein, 2009, p.107)

Reference: Schein, E. (2009). Helping: How to offer, give and receive help.  San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Photo credit: “Teamwork” by Kim S. Creative Commons Licensed.

Helper roles: Process consultant, expert, doctor

Help

This is a continuation of my thoughts and notes on “helping” in the context of educational development (see here for my first blog post on this topic). I have been reading Schein’s “Helping: How to offer, give and receive help” and am finding it very relevant to my work (and beyond).

 In Chapter 3, Schein describes three helper roles that we can potentially adopt:

  • Expert resource who provides information or services
  • Doctor who diagnoses and prescribes (extension and enlargement of above)
  • Process consultant who focuses on building an equitable relationship and clarifies what kind of help is needed.

Though we often go between all three roles, we should begin any helping relationship in the role of process consultant. By engaging in humble inquiry, the process consultant establishes trust between the client (the word Schein uses for any individual who is receiving help) and herself; this minimizes the imbalance between the two individuals.

Adopting the process consultant role does the following:

  1. Reduces the ignorance inherent in the situation
  2. Minimizes the initial status differential
  3. Identifies what other role(s) may be most suitable for the identified problem.

Fundamental to the process consultant role “is the assumption that clients must be encouraged to remain proactive, in the sense of retaining both the diagnostic and remedial initiative because only they own the problem identified, only they know the true complexity of their situation, and only they know what will work for them in the culture in which they live” (Schein, 2009, p.62)

The above has prompted me to think about the role(s) I adopt in my educational development work. Though I strive to be/stay curious and ask questions, I wonder if I do so to the extent that is necessary to be truly helpful, especially when I am first approached for help.  I will pay more attention to this and to how I switch between roles.

 

Reference: Schein, E. (2009). Helping: How to offer, give and receive help.  San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

 

Photo credit: Eva the Weaver “Help” (Creative Commons Licensed)