Group items tagged

an entry point to a checklist of conditions for organizers and facilitators to foster when running a collaborative process. The checklists are organized under four headings: Respect, Risk, Revelation, Re-engagement. The thinking behind these headings is, in brief, that a well-facilitated collaborative process keeps us listening actively to each other, fostering mutual Respect that allows Risks to be taken, elicits more insights than any one person came in with (Revelation), and engages us in carrying out and carrying on the plans we develop (Re-engagement). What we come out with is very likely to be larger and more durable than what any one person came in with; the more so, the more voices that are brought out by the process. The sequence of 4Rs grew out of an an annual series of experimental, interaction-intensive, interdisciplinary workshops that "foster collaboration among those who teach, study, and engage with the public about scientific developments and social change" (http://www.stv.umb.edu/newssc.html). Since we named the 4Rs, we have found ourselves using them to review and redesign our teaching, theories about learning, committee meetings, and, in general, the cultivation of collaborators.

ResIST is a multinational collaborative research partnership that seeks to explore the role that science and technology in increasing inequalities but also the ways in which science and technology can address these same inequities. The research teams from Germany, Malta, Mozambique, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Turkey, the UK and the US are engaged in 5 separate but coordinated research endeavors. ResIST provides a nice template for how transnational knowledge building might work.

The Public Science Project situated at the CUNY Graduate Center works in a participatory action research agenda.  They work in collaboration with groups on the ground. The website states:  "PAR Collective, we began our work as a coalition of activists, researchers, youth, elders, lawyers, prisoners, and educators, launching projects on educational injustice, lives under surveillance,and the collateral damage of mass incarceration. Most of our projects have been situated in schools and/or community-based organizations struggling for quality education, economic opportunities, and human rights. Knowledge-sharing research camps set the stage for most of our research, designed to bring together differently positioned people around a common table to design and implement the research: youth and educators; young people who have been pushed out of schools and mothers organizing for quality education in communities under siege; prisoners, organizers, and academics. Most projects have vibrant advisory boards of youth, community elders, educators and/or activists to shape the work and hold us accountable to the needs and desires of local communities." They conduct research, trainings, and consulting services as well as resources for PAR.

Published by the Council of Canadian Academies, this paper reviews a bit of the history of the relationship between policy and science, as well as policy and scientists. The author, Executive VP of the Council, starts from a broad view, describing an "is (fact)/ought (value)" dichotomy between science and policy, moves closer to characterize the range of relationships between scientists and policymakers and their attitudes toward each other, describes their spheres of influence (world of progress v. world of power), and finally makes the case for government as a place for collaboration and progress employing both. Saner offers some "take-home messages" and some questions for further exploration, including how to meet the needs of each while facilitating communication; managing the divergent cultures to reach successful ends; creating incentives for both players to join the effort; and adapting to the multitude of ways the differences between these two groups manifest themselves around policy issues.

I've just been reading some papers from the journal of economic education and I got the need to share this one with all of you. Mind mapping seems like an exciting resource very close to concept mapping. The authors note that these resources are crucial in creating a more engaging and collaborative learning environment. Although they try to test the degree of learning among 39 students, their results are dubious do to the small sample size and only suggestive. Yet the conclusion remains, these resources create a more active learning class motivating students and creating more class participation.