Making of a Learning Theater

Posted on by Brian Hughes
"Library Orientation" in the Learning Theater, Summer 2016 by Yuntong Man
“Library Orientation” in the Learning Theater, Summer 2016 by Yuntong Man

I just had the great fortune of spending two days with Leakey Foundation members exploring the meaning of evolution (and human origins) in relation to the theme of “human survival.” It was an amazing experience led by seven thoughtful and well-spoken scientists speaking about diverse topics such as physiology, virology, climatology, behavioral psychology, and more.

It not only led me to reflect on how to describe my work, but (perhaps predictably) how to describe it at a cocktail party in under two minutes. And for me, that’s the challenge of describing EdLab.

What are folks at EdLab doing?

At EdLab, our work touches on many of the ideas that were explored during two days of discussions on the survival of humans—namely, how can education help us solve our most difficult problems as a species?

We do a lot of experimental software and multimedia projects at EdLab, and we also run the Gottesman Libraries—a local, service-oriented side of our work that keeps us enmeshed in the immediate, day-to-day work of the Teachers College community of 5,000 teachers and researchers. And for the past two years, some of us have been involved in making a “learning theater”—an extension of both the “experimental” and “practical” sides of our work.

Creating a “Learning Theater”

I’ve been deeply involved in this project of conceptualizing, developing, building, and programming the Smith Learning Theater. Indeed, just recently I’ve spent many hours optimizing the workflow of the soon-to-be-completed AV system; multimedia, however, is only one aspect of this expansive project. In light of my recent cocktail party experience, I’ll risk summarizing the purpose and mission of this experimental space as follows:

The Learning Theater is designed as a multi-use space for active learning supported by innovative multimedia technology, a unique software platform, and the most knowledgeable teachers in the world.

(Oh, did I forget to mention that it’s a unique and complex architectural endeavor at one of the world’s leading educational institutions, and possibly the most advanced space of its kind in the world!? That’s right: pretty cool stuff.)

We’ll be unpacking this mission over the next decade, and trying to live up to the potential this space affords us and our collaborators. But if someone asks me right now what that means to make this space work, these are some of the ideas that come to mind:

  • Exploring the pedagogical and technological potential of such a space with everyone who uses it.
  • Working smarter, harder, and finding the right colleagues who are willing to undertake this inherently interdisciplinary work.
  • Taking risks, and resisting institutional pressures that diminish creativity.
  • Making an effort to share Learning Theater experiences with the whole world.
  • Thoughtfully supporting even modest efforts to use the Learning Theater.
  • …and rigorously demonstrating how learning happens in an active, comfortable space!

The Learning Theater should change the world. It should change education and, importantly, perceptions of education; it should deepen respect for teaching as a noble, complex, and valuable vocation.

This week I witnessed a handful of caring, thoughtful, visionary, and eminent scientists agreeing that, above all, the well-being of the human race essentially rests on the ability of teachers (of all kinds) to inspire billions of people to be more imaginative, curious, and empathetic.

It’s a complex problem a whole bunch of people need to work together to solve.

Join us!

Post-Rock Star Teams

Posted on by Brian Hughes

Valerie Aurora, Mary Gardiner, and Leigh Honeywell have co-authored a great blog post “No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities”. The article is primarily about supporting women, but it’s also a great read on making more supportive, collaborative, creative teams.

It’s probably worth taking another look at Godin’s Linchpin with ideas from this article, and see how it holds up against the “rock star” metaphor.

The Perfect Team?

Posted on by Brian Hughes

Cross-posted from my EdLab blog:

There’s a don’t-miss read in the Times about teams at work: What Google Learned From Its Quest to Build the Perfect Team

I think we aspire to build strong teams across our whole organization, but this is a great reminder about habits and indicators that will help us continue to do so… and perhaps even improve over time.

Particularly salient:

What Project Aristotle has taught people within Google is that no one wants to put on a ‘‘work face’’ when they get to the office. No one wants to leave part of their personality and inner life at home. But to be fully present at work, to feel ‘‘psychologically safe,’’ we must know that we can be free enough, sometimes, to share the things that scare us without fear of recriminations…

The article also made me think about how hard it is to create the conditions for psychological safety across a 40+ person team. It’s probably impossible… but it makes me think about how activities like “The Learning Theater Games” can be an important organizational “mixer”—allowing for repeat interactions with a different (but consistent) team across time.

What are other ways we could do this? Or, what could we do to improve the LT Games? I suspect we should make the teams a little smaller, but I’m unsure…

I wanted to be Todd Howard

Posted on by Brian Hughes

2912914-fallout4_concept_blast_1434323459

When I was 15 years old, I definitely wanted to be Todd Howard:

On November 10, Howard’s latest project arrived like a thunderclap: Fallout 4 is the biggest game his team has ever made, a Skyrim-sized post-nuclear world brimming with more than 100,000 lines of spoken dialogue, coupled to a mammoth crafting system fed by all those wasteland odds and ends players can pluck from dilapidated desks and derelict trashcans.

In other words, he creates vast, virtual worlds for video games. These days I’m not as interested in the virtual worlds, but Howard’s work itself—the work it takes to create those worlds—is very interesting!

Documentaries in the curriculum

Posted on by Brian Hughes
Filming_Documentary_about_Sinenjongo_High_School_in_Joe_Slovo_Park,_Cape_Town,_South_Africa_-_02
Someone documenting someone!

Jeff Frank‘s article on expanding the educational significance of documentary film (Frank 2013, detail below) is a thoughtful reflection on how film and education can intersect.

Frank is a philosopher interested in better understanding education generally, with a specific interest in literature and other narrative texts (I love that he teaches a class entitled, “What Does it Mean to be Educated?”).

In this essay he outlines how educators can be “responsive to genre” when teaching from/with documentary films. By contrasting how a documentary approach is different from a “news” approach, Frank surfaces issues of how bias is constructed and experienced through media. He argues that a documentary film necessarily surfaces the issue of how a subject is represented, and what the inherent biases, shortcomings, or values of that approach may be to the viewer. News, for example, often sidesteps this “deeper” discussion of the many problems of representation (perhaps, not wrongly, news relies more heavily on the “brand identity of the publisher?).

He then returns to his claim that documentary film is a more meaningful educational tool than a source of mere content, connecting it’s method (of surfacing issues of representation) to the project of building a democratic public. Drawing on Stanley Cavell’s voice and work, Frank shows how engaging a documentary might lead someone through a “transformational” educational experience—the kind of experience where the world changes you. Very cool.

 

Full citation: Frank, J. (2013). The Claims of Documentary: Expanding the educational significance of documentary film. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 45(10), 1018-1027.

What’s the future of Twitter?

Posted on by Brian Hughes

image

Twitter stock has recently suffered as a result of weak earnings (and related confidence), so I’ve been reflecting on the value I place in it versus Facebook.

Everyone’s surely different, but I figure one way for me to assess it is to evaluate the differences between the list of my Facebook friends and the accounts I follow on Twitter (I have to add my handle to my own list’s URL on Twitter, but of course with my “default” settings I can’t even share my Facebook list).

So what do I see? In my case, a rather subtle difference! Even before this comparison, I recognize that in my case I use these services in very similar ways—some close friends, some strangers—in short, a mixed social bag on both accounts. But by looking closely, the “game-ish” contours of Twitter start to emerge…

  • where word-smithing is more important… and fun (it’s such a chore on Facebook)
  • where I feel like I’m actively doling out social recognition by re-tweeting and favoriting (as opposed to the more personal Facebook “like”)
  • where I can easily search for new ideas (and break out of my filter bubble)
  • where I can blend my personal and professional interests (there just isn’t room for my professional self on Facebook
  • where my new ideas seems to matter more than my same old self

The indicators above seem like distinctly intellectual features that such a service could offer. In all other ways, Facebook and Twitter seem almost identical to me.

I recognize that this is a very particular case, and that there are many other ways to use these services. But, head-to-head, pound-for-pound, I also suspect that there is a deeper indication here that Twitter, even (or perhaps especially) when viewed as a redundant service, is of equal social value to Facebook in the emerging world.

Perhaps, even greater.

 

image credit: http://attending.io/events/free-lunchtime-intro-workshop-twitter-facebook-ads

Learning with Apple Live

Posted on by Brian Hughes

Apple’s live events keep evolving, and I would love to be able to use their “live broadcasting” toolkit—essentially turning their website into a media-rich live blog of the event. Here’s a screenshot of what today’s Apple Watch-focused event looked like:

Screen Shot 2015-03-09 at 2.17.49 PM

 

The key features of this mode of presentation are:

  • Live video of the main presentation—which is being produced somewhere (usually California) for a live audience.
  • Produced video elements are used during the presentation. Split-screens are sometimes used to juxtapose the speaker and other content (as above).
  • Pre-made, widget-like cards appear from top to bottom with short summaries (including images and video) of the presentation content. They have simple, built-in social sharing functionality.
  • When you scroll down to see older cards, the video is shrunk to a thumbnail and continues to play at the top of the page.

These elements combine for a simple, compelling online presentation. One can easily step away and come back, and skim the cards to see what was missed. It would be equally great if the presentation could be replayed from the point of any ‘card’… though I don’t think this is currently the case!

So, if I had this presentation toolkit, would I use it? Given the amount of pre-planning and multimedia in use, it would certainly take a significant up-front investment (e.g., time, money, preparation). However, to deliver a high-impact event to a web audience, it seems like a great place to start.

I especially like the live element—which underscores the event with the sense that, “this would be even more impressive in person, but I’m as close as I can get!”

Techitecture, The Emergence of

Posted on by Brian Hughes

My involvement in Teacher College’s Learning Theater project makes me appreciate how fast-evolving audio/video technologies (or better: display/capture/collaboration technologies) challenge traditional architecture.

Our project feels like “techitecture”—a combination of technology and architectural design and development. (And I’m curious that, having imagined this fanciful term, I have not found it used before in this way.)

The fit and function of technology elements in our space will go beyond traditional theater. Not only will the audience not be “fixed” (in seats, etc.), but it’s not even clear to us what events will eventually unfold in the space.

article-2700073-1FD8588400000578-158_634x462Designing the learning theater space seems more akin to designing the holodeck. It will essentially appear as an empty grid until users imagine ways to activate it.

In undertaking this type of project, it’s clear that architects need to be brave, and AV consultants need to be braver still… We are essentially designing a digital space with bulky materials from the past, and just enough matter to support the needs of humans.

And coffee.