tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post384957284729583458..comments2023-06-11T04:03:03.102-07:00Comments on What Should We Do With Our Classrooms?: Metaphors We Teach By, Part Three - Consider the Rhizome: On Deterritorializing Silos in SchoolsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-49313356086579728272018-12-26T03:51:19.167-08:002018-12-26T03:51:19.167-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.yash kaushabhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04470031347393871614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-32055312830153068132018-03-28T05:36:24.885-07:002018-03-28T05:36:24.885-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05113011726015879936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-76242339600994819962015-12-24T12:00:03.951-08:002015-12-24T12:00:03.951-08:00Thanks again for commenting, but there's a bit...Thanks again for commenting, but there's a bit of a misunderstanding here. I am not the nail for the counterrevolutionary hammer you wield. I urge you to look over my post again. I'm not referencing "edtech", the internet, or technological connectivity: that's not my focus here at all, and to fetishize tech as some all serving solution to learning would be to embrace a kind of tech-utopian philistinism that's contrary to what I believe to be most meaningful about working in education. If you look at the five examples of rhizomatic deterritorialization I list at the end, only 2 out of the 5 have anything to do with the integration of tech into a learning experience.<br /><br />Also, I am not withdrawing claims about the good and the bad: again, I'm exploring new offshoots, models, and metaphors that MIGHT serve an institution or community more effectively for realizing some vision or aim upon which they've agreed as being worthy of pursuit. A deeper post about why the community in which I participate has selected the ends in question would take several installments at best. My only tactic here is looking for what works, not because I lack the courage to make deeper commitments, but due to the limited scope of intention set forth for the blog post above. I do agree: there are harder questions about the goodness of ends (questions that can only be asked in a context, however), and all of us should be performing that critique continually as well.<br /><br />Back to tech & connectedness: we don't have to look to technology to see what I mean about students being more connected (maybe I should just say "less siloed" b/c that was the real focus of the post, namely how to think about organizing differently). I think my friend, Joel, gave a great example in his above comment in reference to the experience of homework. And again, it's not about whether being connected or being isolated is good or bad (and there are many virtues to isolation!): It's a question about how does homework work from each participant’s perspective and how could homework work differently? To be clear: (pure) connectivity cannot be privileged as being some inherently “better” or “more good” property than (pure) isolation: in fact, I reject the meaningfulness of trying to moralize the ontology of properties altogether. For my purposes here, it’s about how things work, not what they are.<br /><br />Thank you for the link to your post, but I’m not the digital revolutionary you seek to counter. I’d urge you to think of my small-scale efforts here in more charitable terms. Look at the examples I gave at the end: do those strike you as examples of learning experiences born out of a pedagogy which asserts “that most essential forms of learning are those that can happen online”? You may still see my project as one born out of the binaries of the horizontal vs. the vertical, but I think we may be on closely similar sides (and there’s multiple sides) of history here. However, the binary of revolution & counter-revolution may have caused a kind of hermeneutic of suspicion, making it difficult to tell where each person is specifically and uniquely coming from. <br /><br />I can tell you clearly where I am not coming from: although I may be on the internet right now, that is not the soil upon which I cultivate my garden. Thanks, and I look forward to reading more posts on your blog.Jaredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15668637066226373934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-77663961306689191992015-12-24T03:44:51.396-08:002015-12-24T03:44:51.396-08:00Jared, thanks for continuing the conversation. You...Jared, thanks for continuing the conversation. Your clarification that "It's not about connection being good or disconnection being bad" is welcome. That wasn't the impression created by the post, though. Your reference to "highly connected students" and "isolated instructors" seemed to imply that connection was prima facie good and isolation prima facie bad - a familiar feature of a lot of edtech hype. And the first item on your list of rhizomatic features is "pure connectivity". "Be rhizomatic and connect," seems to be the imperative here. And the connection is (it would seem) digital. The soil of the new rhizome is the internet. How else could the rhizome grow? Digital connection, therefore, is prima facie good.<br /><br />Your tactic in qualifying things involves withdrawing claims about what is good and bad. But to uphold the radical intent we need to have the courage of our convictions and insist on what is indeed good in those ends you describe. <br /><br />Instead of withdrawing the claims about the good and the bad, the dubious binary could be qualified by acknowledging the ways in which connection can be bad and isolation good. Does the internet, for instance, "nurture a warm, positive culture based on respect, responsibility and empathy"? Does it lead by some genie inherent in the tech towards a rhizomatic culture antithetical to all the old verticality of the fiefdom? We think not. Quite the opposite in some cases. <br /><br />Before seeing your reply here we began to write a response to your embrace of the rhizomatic metaphor. In the process we felt that the metaphor actually does very little work. Instead, it seemed that the real work was being done by an assumed antithesis of a new horizontality flourishing online clashing with the old verticality of the pedagogic fiefdom you mention. The clash is imagined to be one between some remnant of the feudal and a digital horizontal. We have tried to articulate our doubts about that framing of things here: <br /><br />http://www.digitalcounterrevolution.co.uk/2015/radical-digital-connectivity-myth/Torn Halveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18179353922087887957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-51171290109435955792015-12-20T09:58:13.182-08:002015-12-20T09:58:13.182-08:00Thanks Aaron for reading and sharing your comment....Thanks Aaron for reading and sharing your comment. The resource teacher is a wonderful example of the nomad who negotiates the borders of various territories. My school does not have a program for students with disabilities, but my previous place of work did. I always felt that the resource teacher had the most connections across the campus but was the least heard voice at faculty/staff meetings. To me, that seemed frustratingly disproportionate. Looking forward to more #Rhizo16 conversations.Jaredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15668637066226373934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-6434047914475088802015-12-20T09:49:04.573-08:002015-12-20T09:49:04.573-08:00Thanks so much for reading and commenting on the p...Thanks so much for reading and commenting on the post. I appreciate your thoughts. To be clear, I think demonizing binaries would be about as convincing as trying to morally condemn a certain school of architecture. And I agree that such a reductive distribution of values (good and bad, etc.) would simply be a return to binary thinking. <br /><br />I'm looking for ways to depart from the 'siloed' approach of mapping an organization (not because it’s bad, but because it may not work as well as other approaches), and I simply offered one possible line of flight (but not under the assumption that this is the only other option. Nor would I assume that one model is always 'good' for all institutions at all given moments.) Good and bad never came up in my vocabulary. It's not about connection being good or disconnection being bad; it's a question about what we (a given group or institution, etc.) want to achieve and therefore what strategies for mapping can best expand our journey for getting there. Rhizomatic models are not good or bad; the question is whether the model works for helping one achieve the agreed-upon ends.<br /><br />At our school we've agreed upon the following vision for our classroom culture:<br /> embraces hands-on learning and authentic experiences.<br /> encourages students to find their voices as they develop and share their passions.<br /> engages in a meaningful and timely feedback loop.<br /> facilitates the exchange of ideas and experiences within a global community.<br /> fosters digital organization, literacy and citizenship.<br /> inspires inquiry, creative thinking and problem-solving skills.<br /> nurtures a warm, positive culture based on respect, responsibility and empathy.<br /> promotes character development and leadership skills.<br /> provides a variety of learning tools and resources, both inside and outside the classroom.<br /> supports a blend of established and progressive teaching methods.<br /><br />And we desire to realize a culture as described above for purposes of empowering self-directed problem solvers who think critically and creatively, communicate effectively, collaborate with others, and cultivate a sense of character while preparing for the cosmopolitan world that awaits them. Again, it's not that Silos are bad in some way, but it's a question of whether they work best with the vision and priorities described above. And it's not about having one other binary alternative. A better blog post than mine would have made that clearer. The point is always multiplicity and not one binary for another.<br /><br />I hope it's clear that I in no way endorse a line of thought that syllogistically deduces that all rhizomatic phenomena are good, and I apologize if you think my reflections here imply that "Old-style teaching" is bad. My class looks pretty "Old-style" many days of the year. It is about keeping the conversation going, however, so we might multiply the strategies for practicing effective pedagogy. Some of those strategies are centuries-old. Some are not. Effective teachers have multiple offshoots. And effective discourse for growing pedagogy in no way should shun the “old styles."<br /><br />There is a radical intention here, and I agree that it must not be lost, and it sounds like we share this intention. Thanks again for sharing. Jaredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15668637066226373934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-77084086826954984012015-12-20T01:04:27.426-08:002015-12-20T01:04:27.426-08:00You demonise binary thinking, but your post rests ...You demonise binary thinking, but your post rests on something that looks rather binary: the silo vs. the rhizome. Perhaps the core of that binary is the opposition between disconnection and connection. You emphasize how disconnected silos are. Disconnection is bad; connection is good. Students are connected; students are good. Old-style teachers are disconnected; they are bad. <br /><br />There is a radical intention here which must not be lost, but the binary thinking thwarts it.<br /><br />How are we to "prepare the citizens of our global future?" you ask. The students, who are connected, instinctively know that the future demands connection, but the teachers are isolated in their silos, so we need a new metaphor for a new form of organisation - one more in tune with the hyper-connected global future that everyone outside those terribly siloed educational establishments is so excited about. <br /><br />Hang on! What has happened to those old factories and silos? Something rather rhizomatic has destroyed them. The old verticality of a culture that looked down on the nasty "business" of making money and reducing everuthing to commercial considerations has been destroyed, and a new horizontal has been instituted with a perfect fluidity that sloshes to the four corners of our connected globe. <br /><br />If there is a hope for the future, it presupposes the ability to disconnect from this surprisingly rhizomatic cultural cancer. Cancer, too, is perfectly horizontal. <br /><br />The fact that something is rhizomatic does not make it good. <br /><br />The fact that something is connected does not make it good. <br /><br />Connected to what? With a view to what? <br /><br />Provisional conclusion: No, we do not need a new metaphor. We should not rush for a new blueprint. The task of critique has hardly even begun. First there must be a great resistance, the strength of which will be measured by the willingness to disconnect. Then we can begin to talk about new metaphors for a new world to be instituted by those who have disconnected from the old.Torn Halveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18179353922087887957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-71856157459276903022015-12-18T13:53:40.229-08:002015-12-18T13:53:40.229-08:00So much to think about here, Jared, and I really e...So much to think about here, Jared, and I really enjoyed reading through it a few times. Deleuze is famously obtuse so I'm always surprised when someone makes his ideas more clear and sees their applicability. I had not thought about this idea of the student as nomad, but my applicability happens mostly around supports for kids and adults with disabilities (I really like how the researchers Griet Roets and Dan Goodley talk about this). I have thought of the idea of the itinerant resource teachers - not sure if you have those in the U.S., but they theoretically go from class to class to help support the inclusion of students with disabilities - as a possible nomad in what D & G call "the war machine" (the system, I think). But, here, these are relatively the most disempowered faculty - though at least one of the local districts is looking at what might happen if they are better supported. Looking forward to more discussions in the upcoming #Rhizo16 group... aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18298263622146741087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-81190044625864462722015-12-17T16:48:28.644-08:002015-12-17T16:48:28.644-08:00Thanks for the insight Joel! You're so right! ...Thanks for the insight Joel! You're so right! When homework is administered in a siloed framework, the nomads will be forced into a frantic mode of constant displacement. Homework needs to be meaningful and relevant, not disconnected and compartmentalized. I love that students at Greenhill are having that conversation! Thanks for the comment!Jaredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15668637066226373934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033889867235759780.post-45803270047623140572015-12-17T16:06:58.462-08:002015-12-17T16:06:58.462-08:00The silo model harms the students the most in a co...The silo model harms the students the most in a context you didn't mention yet--homework. Each siloed instructor assigns exactly the amount of homework necessary to guide the student through the unit...knowing nothing of the time demands of the student's four other academic instructors, soccer coach, orchestra instructor, advisory, tutor, etc. (Let's set family and religious silos aside for simplicity.) Not surprisingly, students practice a kind of frantic nomadism on weeks like this one. You've got a Spanish test Monday and an English essay Tuesday, so you'd be kind of a fool to do anything Sunday night but study for Spanish. Nothing, to them, is connected, and as a result, in the worst possible scenario, nothing really ever takes root. On Greenhill's campus, the student council is discussing how to address the consequences of a siloed campus. One suggestion I made: Have student volunteers photocopy their academic planners--practices, travel time, class time, school meetings, dinner, showering...the works. Give those photocopies to faculty during orientation week. : ) <br />Thanks, Jared!Joelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10216643105687699035noreply@blogger.com