About

The world is complicated.

While I AM willing to state the obvious, I refuse to back down from a challenge — and this complicated world presents quite a challenge. Too often, we peek out at it, catch a glimpse of the various social problems beleaguering folks near and far, and we shut down, numb out, close our eyes, disavow responsibility — that is, if we even stop to consider others. Now, that “we” I alluded to was a sincere “you and me” — I’m definitely including myself in this bunch of overwhelmed onlookers. We’re overwhelmed by so much; for, not only is the world complicated (as I so insightfully pointed out), but our own little lives are complicated, jampacked with sundry obligations and constantly buffeted by eddies of social/political/natural/technological change. I’m not sure that life was ever “easy” (and I’m not sure that that’s ever been the point), but life certainly isn’t easy in the 21st century.

Still. Just as bridging the local and the global has introduced complication, so too does it present possibility. We have the extraordinary opportunity to engage with one another, foreign and domestic, mediated and face-to-face, to try to make things better. In my opinion, the best way to fix a problem is to prevent its manifestation in the first place. That means ensuring communities’ and individuals’ access to the developmental assets they need to thrive. The second best way to fix a problem is to support locals as they endeavor to fix it. That means fostering communities’ and individuals’ mastery of the primary skills they need for lifelong learning.

Scholarship for Social Change is about working to bring about that rising tide that lifts all boats. There are several ways to get at it –conversation, rumination, theory-building, fieldwork. Luck. Love. Lots of good food… I hope you’ll join this team effort by commenting and, more importantly, getting out there and dirtying your hands in this messy business of making the world a better place.

Thanks. :)

_____________________________________________________________

“The greatest truth must be recognition that in every man, in every child is the potential for greatness.”

-Robert F. Kennedy

Scholarship for social change demands prowling the borders between cultural difference and universality, bridging diverse fields in order to identify and implement fundamental skills for rich learning. It requires using multi-disciplinary theory and real world data to craft curricula that better engages students intellectually, socially, emotionally, and ethically. If we can strike the right balance, respecting the old, the new, the unexpected, and the unstructured, then we will have discovered something truly extraordinary – not only the mechanisms of meaningful learning, but the means for better realizing our individual and collective potential.


How do we facilitate meaningful learning? Do certain skills function as a universal point of departure, enabling all learners’ future exploration and growth? How best can we share these primary skills with every individual who aspires to learn?

Most would agree, contemporary education requires retooling. Domestically, issues pertaining to students’ physical wellness (e.g., reproductive health, obesity) and social functioning (e.g., bullying, self-esteem) follow them to school, impacting both classroom climate and academic achievement. Internationally, education has been recognized as an imperative for development (Roudi-Fahimi & Moghadam, 2003), yet its efficacy is often blunted by lack of resources and community support[1]. Meanwhile, contemporary emphases on standardized testing and digital opportunity[2] call into question what to teach and how to teach it, often engendering controversy and highlighting the disparity between the world’s “have’s” and “have not’s.”

A Primary Skills Set

To respond to these challenges, as well as take on twenty-first century learning benchmarks (Trilling & Fadel, 2009) and millennium development goals (United Nations, 2010), educators must support the basics. But the basics do not refer to classic “reading, writing, and ‘rithmetic”; the basics are even more fundamental, constituting the skills that enable learning of “the R’s” in the first place. These primary skills pertain to new media literacies (NMLs), social and emotional learning (SEL), asset appreciation, and narrative.

New media literacies.

Seminal publication Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century (Jenkins, Purushotma, Clinton, Weigel, & Robinson, 2006), defined NMLs as “a set of cultural competencies and social skills that young people need in the new media landscape” (p. 4). This bears repeating for the skills’ name is somewhat of a misnomer. While NMLs have become increasingly vital due to the demands of new technology, neither are the NMLs new nor are they technology-dependent (Felt, 2010c). The 12 NML skills are: play; performance; simulation; appropriation; multitasking; distributed cognition; collective intelligence; judgment; transmedia navigation; networking; negotiation; and visualization. Mastery of these useful, versatile skills both taps and fosters the development of dynamic processes, such as critically thinking, collaborating, and problem-solving. Because these processes are indispensable to learning (Gee, 2007; Lankshears & Knobel, 2003; Lyman, Ito, Thorne, & Carter, 2009), NMLs can be understood as elements of a “primary skills set.”

Social and emotional learning.

Self-awareness, self-regulation, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making constitute SEL’s five core groups of competencies (Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, 2009). Empirical research has found that recipients of SEL training tend to utilize more daily behaviors related to getting along with and cooperating with others, and report “more positive attitudes toward self and others (e.g., self-concept, self-esteem, prosocial attitudes toward aggression, and liking and feeling connected to school)” than peers in a control group. SEL programming has also been linked to an average gain on achievement test scores of 11 to 17 percentile points (Payton, Weissberg, Durlak, Dymnicki, Taylor, Schellinger, & Pachan, 2008, pp. 6-7). Moreover, SEL programs provide an impressive return on investment in terms of dollars and cents and sustained behavior change (Botvin, 1998, 2002; Hawkins, Kosterman, Catalano, Hill & Abbott, 2008; Schaps, Battistich, & Solomon, 2004). This sense of intrapersonal integration and social connectedness prepares individuals for meaningful learning (Durlak & Weissberg, 2007; Goleman, 1996, 2006; Hoffman, 2000; Zins & Elias, 2006) by freeing them from preoccupations and hang-ups and enabling richer engagement. Bulwarked by social and emotional health, learners are ready – ready to learn across their ecologies, participate fully, experiment courageously, collaborate productively, fail spectacularly, and keep on going.

Asset appreciation.

Immersion in diverse bodies of literature inspired the theoretical bricolage[3] that is the “asset appreciation” construct. Asset appreciation unifies academically separate yet philosophically complementary theory from research on resilience (Luthar, Cichetti, & Becker, 2000; Yates, Egeland, & Sroufe, 2003), possible selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986; Clark, Miller, Nagy, Avery, Roth, Liddon, & Mukherjee, 2005), positive deviance (Pascale, Sternin, & Sternin, 2010; Singhal, Sternin, & Dura, 2009), asset-based community development (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1997; Kretzmann, McKnight, Dobrowolski, & Puntenney, 2005), intrinsic motivation (Deci & Flaste, 1996) and appreciative inquiry (Bushe & Kassam, 2005; Cooperrider & Whitney, 2005). Asset appreciation aims to capture the extent to which an individual and/or community recognizes the availability of internal and external resources and exploits them to their fullest potential. Simply knowing about resources can help people to get their needs met with greater ease and comprehensiveness, particularly in times of stress. Appreciating resources as assets can boost people’s quality of life perceptions and sense of self and/or collective efficacy (Bandura, 1994; 1997) because it frames the environment as rich and oneself as embedded in a support network. Behaving resourcefully and framing situations productively facilitates meaningful learning because such acts, like NMLs, tap and foster processes of critical thinking, collaborating and problem-solving. Implicit in these acts are the SEL skills of self-awareness and social awareness; as such, asset appreciation similarly enables learners’ engagement and seeds unfettered exploration and growth.

Narrative.

The fourth pillar of this paradigm is narrative. Stories are hailed by various constituencies as a universal attribute of humankind (Campbell, 1949/2008), the most natural mode of thought (Schank & Abelson, 1995; Sarbin, 1986), a tool for establishing identity (Siegel & Hartzell, 2003), a frame for constructing reality (Berger & Luckmann, 1966), a means to gratify needs (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1974), a commodity of enormous value (see Hollywood), or simply a good ol’ way to pass the time. Lately, health communication scholars have documented (Bandura, 1977, 2004a; Green & Brock, 2002; Singhal, Cody, Rogers, & Sabido, 2004) what Aesop’s and de la Fontaine’s fables long ago established: stories can teach. Moreover, stories can assess (Carr, 2001; Davies & Dart, 2005). Thus narrative skills – the capacities to comprehend and weave stories – can be understood as learning prerequisites.


[1] Sadly, the same can be said of education in the United States.

[2] which does not mean universal access and/or preparation, as access (“the digital divide”) pertains to equipment while preparation (“the participation gap”) pertains to literacy (Jenkins, Purushotma, Clinton, Weigel, & Robinson, 2006)

[3] A French term, bricolage is used by many American academics to refer to “a construction made of whatever materials are at hand; something created from a variety of available things” (Random House, Inc., 2010).

Cooperation

Cooperation is neither the province of women nor an artifact of maturity; cooperation fuels all peoples and emerges from our earliest days.

Kohlberg’s stages of moral development (1958) position obedience as preceding negotiation; thus, cooperation cannot emerge until the capacity for a certain amount of cognitive complexity has been achieved. While Gilligan’s In a Different Voice (1982) illuminated several deficiencies in Kohlberg’s vision, it did so on the basis of gender bias. According to Gilligan, “They [women] developed in a way that focused on connections among people (rather than separation) and with an ethic of care for those people (rather than an ethic of justice)” (Huff, 2001).

Designating empathy and cooperativeness as expressions of subgroups rather than universal human traits, though, is incredibly problematic. First, just who or what are men and women anyway? I wonder how, if at all, Gilligan’s paradigm accommodates for socially-constructed gender vs. biologically-tied sex. What happens when these superficial distinctions break down, as in the case of butch females, drag queens, transsexuals, intersex individuals, etc? Second, how do the historical record and contemporary social structures support this theory of opposing, partisan priorities? While I tend to distrust biological determinism, human evolution and culture, broadly defined, suggest that all peoples value collaboration and connection. Similarly (and sadly), abuse can induce individuals from all walks of life to commit atrocities that tear those institutions asunder.

Dacher Keltner’s Born to Be Good: The Science of a Meaningful Life (2009) argues that we are hard-wired to reach out and love someone:

“Jen science is based on its own microscopic observations of things not closely examined before. Most centrally, it is founded on the study of emotions such as compassion, gratitude, awe, embarrassment, and amusement, emotions that transpire between people, bringing the good in each other to completion. Jen science has examined new human languages under its microscope—movements of muscles in the face that signal devotion, patterns of touch that signal appreciation, playful tones of the voice that transform conflicts. It brings into focus new substances that we are made of, neurotransmitters as well as regions of our nervous system that promote trust, caring, devotion, forgiveness, and play. It reveals a new way of thinking about the evolution of human goodness, which requires revision of longstanding assumptions that we are solely wired to maximize desire, to compete, and to be vigilant to what is bad” (Keltner, 2009, para 3).

Along a similar vein, Richard Sennett’s Together: The Rituals, Pleasures and Politics of Cooperation (2012) conceptualizes cooperation as a homegrown, human craft. Excitingly, he draws on developmentalist Erik Erikson and children’s gaming to strengthen his argument:

“Reflexive, self-critical thinking doesn’t imply withdrawal from other kids; children can be reflexive together. One piece of evidence Erikson provides for this process is game-playing. At the age of five to six, children begin to negotiate the rules for games, rather than, as at the age of two to three, take the rules as givens; the more negotiation occurs, the more strongly do children become bonded to one another in game-playing…

“Erikson’s sweeping point about this passage is that cooperation precedes individuation: cooperation is the foundation of human development, in that we learn how to be together before we learn how to stand apart. Erikson may seem to declare the obvious: we could not develop as individuals in isolation. Which means, though, that the very misunderstandings, separations, transitional objects and self-criticism which appear in the course of development are tests of how to relate to other people rather than how to hibernate; if the social bond is primary, its terms change up to the time children enter formal schooling” (Sennett, 2012)

Our mission, therefore, is to support the skills and spaces that facilitate development of the ties that bind. I’ll stop short of calling for hand-holding and Kumbayah-singing — but if you start the song, you know I’ll chime right in.

War stories

Like my paternal grandparents, my maternal grandfather Ray, his older brother Art, his younger brother Bernie, and his in-law Chuck (whose daughter married Ray’s son) served in the military during World War II. Their respective children contributed their father’s photo in uniform and short bio to the Illinois Holocaust Museum and Education Center‘s exhibit on Jewish WWII soldiers.

Raymond Marcus


Raymond Marcus was inducted into the US Army in August 1942. He was 21 years old. Scoring high on mechanical aptitude tests, Ray was assigned to the 3476 Ordinance MAM Company, a unit comprised of auto and diesel mechanics, gun smiths, black smiths, and heavy equipment operators. On June 7, 1944, Ray drove an equipment-laden, 2 ½ ton GMC 6X6 (nicknamed “Ruthless” after his wife Ruth who he married two days before shipping out overseas), up onto Omaha Beach and ultimately across France, Belgium, Holland, and finally into Germany. At war’s end, Ray’s company was awarded the Distinguished Service Unit Citation for their gallantry in five major battles. Ray passed away in May 2010. He is survived by Ruth, his two children, five grandchildren, and (to date) two great-grandchildren.

Arthur Marcus


Arthur J. Marcus joined the Army Air Force in 1942 after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. He had previously taken flying lessons as a hobby and was hoping to be trained as a combat pilot. While imperfect eyesight kept him from flying, his extensive knowledge of airplanes did qualify him to be trained as a flight engineer and airplane mechanic. Arthur attained the rank of Master Sergeant and was assigned to the China Burma India Theatre. He and his crew spent the war ferrying a diverse variety of airplanes between air bases in Asia and the Pacific Islands, supporting and supplying the advancing troops. He may not have reached his personal goal of becoming a combat pilot, but he took great pride in knowing he was a part of a noble effort.

Bernard Marcus

As a teenager, Bernie Marcus wanted to go off to war like his older brothers Art and Ray. He tried to enlist in the Marines when he was only 15 and a half years old, but they found out he was too young and sent him home. He finally was able to enter the Navy in June 1945 as the war was winding down.

In less than a year, Bernie rose to Petty Officer 3rd Class, serving as a clerk/typist. He spent much of his time typing discharge orders for thousands of grateful sailors.

Following his discharge from the Navy, Bernie joined thousands of GIs who were sent to college under the GI Bill. That same year, he married his high school sweetheart, (Harriet) Louise Moshel, and went to work for his father’s paintbrush business, the Marcus Brush Company. Bernie and Louise eventually had 4 children and left Chicago for California, purchasing a retail patio and garden business. He retired in 1990.

Louise has passed on, but Bernie still lives in California near his daughter. He is blessed with five grandchildren.

Charles Milner


The opportunity to learn to fly led U.S. Army First Lieutenant Charles Milner to give up command of an artillery battery in coastal Alaska in 1944 and to volunteer for the very dangerous job of artillery spotter. First Chuck received flight training. Then he was taught to pilot an unarmed, canvas and balsa-constructed airplane low and slow over enemy lines, while radioing target coordinates to artillery units. Chuck was awaiting orders to go overseas when the war ended. Following his discharge from the Army, Chuck returned to Chicago, his hometown, and took up his career as a wholesale diamond jeweler and gemologist. Chuck passed away in 2001 at the age of 82. He is survived by his wife, two daughters, and four grandchildren.


Buried treasure

In 1990, when my older brother Benjy was 14 years old, he interviewed our Grandpa Ray and wrote a short essay about his life. Last year my mom unearthed it, squirreled away in some nook of Benjy’s bedroom for more than two decades, and Benjy read parts aloud at the unveiling of Grandpa’s headstone in May 2011. Earlier this morning, Dad scanned these seven pages. I’m grateful for this essay’s multiple windows into history. Not only does it depict the Depression and post-WWII eras that marked Grandpa’s life, but it also reminds us of Benjy’s world then — a world where he, as a high school freshman, had to laboriously and neatly handwrite multi-paged essays; a world where spellcheck wasn’t built into the platform upon which he was writing. (How could it be? It was a piece of ruled paper!)

This morning I told my young cousins, a 10-year-old and a 6-year-old who had awoken at 6:30 am in order to jump on my head, that I knew we were watching the NEW Scooby Doo (as opposed to the classic Scooby Doo) because Velma didn’t consult laptops back in my day — they hadn’t been invented yet. Last night, I told them a bedtime story that my Grandma Elly had imagined and related when my sister Sarah and I were little girls. All I could recall was the premise — there once were three Hawaiian sisters named Oola, Moola, and Leela — and I proceeded from there, making up as I went along and regularly asking the girls to fill in blanks. What do you think happened next? I would ask. Molly, a precocious first-grader, contributed a storyline in which baby Leela continued fishing while her older sisters built up the fire for cooking. In addition to netting fish after giant fish, she also attracted a shark! Leela had to bonk him on the head with her little fishing pole to keep him back. When the sisters returned home with fish and tales, no one believed Leela’s story. Personally, that’s where I thought Molly would leave it. But she threw in a detail: “Here’s a video!” Leela said. “See!” And she showed the footage to her parents.

I smiled. When we were Molly’s and Sadie’s ages, Sarah and I never would have thought to suggest such corroborating evidence — videography wasn’t ubiquitous back then. Moreover, Oola, Moola, and Leela were indigenous peasant girls who lived in Hawaii. I’m not sure if Sarah and I would have granted them the technology of even the fork… I also thought that Oola, Moola, and Leela were from the past. I don’t know if Grandma stipulated that, or if I’d assumed that since their life seemed so tranquil and tied to the earth, or if Grandma’s age and the classic quality of her warm voice (I loved my grandma’s voice) led me to associate all of her stories with days of yore.

It doesn’t matter. It’s interesting but it doesn’t matter. What matters is love and family and creativity and storytelling. I’ve always mourned the fact that my grandma, who had been an elementary school teacher and children’s librarian, never got to realize her aspiration of publishing children’s books. I dreamed of getting them published posthumously — I wanted to do her that service. But I realize now that both the stories our grandparents lived and the stories they told live on. I thank my brother and sister, our parents, and the rest of our family for facilitating that beautiful truth.

NOTE: As I scrutinize the date of this essay, I realize the context in which Benjy wrote it. Grandpa Justin had passed away unexpectedly, the result of a stroke tragically mistreated, in January of 1990. Grandma Elly, who’d been struggling against breast cancer for years, moved in with us immediately after. Her older sister Pearl, whose voice to this day sounds just like my grandma’s and moves me nearly to tears every time I talk to her on the phone, also took up residency in our house. But despite these efforts and my grandmother’s powerful will, we lost her a few months later, in June of 1990. This essay’s date: October 1990.

After Dad’s parents could no longer testify, Benjy made sure that we heard from Mom’s.

NOTE: Benjy got his wish — partially. His older daughter, Lyla, was a baby when Grandpa Ray died. Benjy’s younger daughter, Violet, never got to meet her great-grandpa. But maybe someday, if we keep telling these stories, she will.


Play and problem-solving

A workshop for City Year Los Angeles, presented February 9, 2012

  • Why play? What is it?

-new media literacies (NML) definition of play: “the capacity to experiment with one’s surroundings as a form of problem-solving” (Jenkins, Purushotma, Clinton, Weigel, & Robison, 2006, p. 4)

-“Play is a very serious matter… It is an expression of our creativity; and creativity is at the very root of our ability to learn, to cope, and to become whatever we may be” (Rogers & Sharapan, 1994, p. 13).

-Besides being tied to creativity, play is also science – it is the vehicle through which one asks questions, constructs hypotheses, runs trials, analyzes results, and comes to conclusions. Particularly today, as forward-thinkers exhort innovation and policy-makers (solely, and thus myopically) extol the virtues of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), the seriousness and practicality of this should be obvious.

-“In almost every example of what he describes as “the sacred,” play is the defining feature of our most valued cultural rites and rituals. As such, for Huizinga, play is not something we do; it is who we are” (Thomas & Seely Brown, 2011, p. 97).

  • What is play good for?

A1. Tinkering (agenda-less play) → innovation
-A 10-year-old’s unbounded experimentation led to her discovery of a new molecule

00:00-01:30
A2. Tinkering → discovery

-Junior Toy Inventors in Mumbai’s Expanding Minds Program learned about balance by working with sundry materials.

A3. Tinkering → personal and social enrichment
-This culturally-inspired innovation in Senegal contributed to Sunukaddu staff member/inventor Idrissa’s sense of pride and self-efficacy, as well as the benefit of learners near and far.

NOTE: This final photo is from the RFKLab, a space for innovation and community-building at the RFK Community Schools in downtown Los Angeles. Laughter for a Change uses the NMLs in its Tuesday after-school program with high school students. Improvisation is an excellent context and tool for getting at play and other key NMLs.

B1. Gaming (purposeful play) → innovation

“This is the first instance that we are aware of in which online gamers solved a longstanding scientific problem,” writes Khatib. “These results indi­cate the potential for integrating video games into the real-world scientific process: the ingenuity of game players is a formidable force that, if properly directed, can be used to solve a wide range of scientific problems” (Young, 2011).

B2. Gaming → discovery

“… certain games afford their players the opportunity to step virtually into the shoes of a specific profession and, through game play, become familiar with its domains of knowledge, skill base, values, identities, and ways of thinking about the world” (Joseph, 2008, p. 263).

For more about Barry’s incredible global learning and youth development program, check out Global Kids!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Fear Factory
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

06:13-07:06

B3. Gaming → personal and social enrichment

-Becoming a better critical thinker, friend, teammate, person as a result of play

Can you think of an example to illustrate this?

  • Why? How does that work? Why does play produce such incredible results?

1. Flow: “the satisfying, exhilarating feeling of creative accomplishment and heightened functioning” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, p. xiii).

2. Self-efficacy: belief in one’s capacity to produce effects (Bandura, 1977)

Acting in a game demonstrates to players that they can exert power over something, that their efforts make a difference. “Fiero is what we feel after we triumph over adversity” (McGonigal, 2011, p. 33).

3. Capacity-building

Playing enriches perseverance, emotional stamina, mental toughness, and divergent thinking.

4. Community

Game-related talk (processing experience, comparing performance, exchanging feedback, pursuing mastery) builds relationships and community. “Good games… support social cooperation and civic participation at very big scales. And they help us lead more sustainable lives and become a more resilient species” (McGonigal, 2011, p. 350).

  • Play and the NMLs

New media literacies (NMLs) are “a set of cultural competencies and social skills young people need” in a culture that “shifts the focus of literacy from one of individual expression to community involvement” (Jenkins et al., 2006, p. 4).

Despite their name, NMLs are neither “new” nor exclusively about “media”; rather, they are time-honored practices that support critical thinking and problem-solving.

-Why? Because NMLs are tools for problem-solving. New and old media alike pose “problems,” such as understanding new gadgets, working with dissimilar collaborators, and interpreting data. NMLs – in these examples, play, negotiation, and visualization, respectively — offer tools to solve those problems.

Other key NMLs include collective intelligence, “the ability to pool knowledge and compare notes with others towards a common goal”; and negotiation, “the ability to travel across diverse communities, discerning and respecting multiple perspectives, and grasping and following alternative norms” (p. 4)

For more information on NMLs, see newmedialiteracies.org and playnml.wikispaces.com, as well as my publications!

  • Problem-solving

-Problems have an emotional piece to them — they elicit emotional/physical responses in our bodies. Certain strategies can help you to defuse or limit the emotional intensity of a problem. (You can practice these strategies via innovative video game Dojo from GameDesk!)

-Problems also have a practical piece to them — they present real barriers to maximally productive workflow. Which strategies can you invoke for managing conflict and solving problems?

  • ABCDE Exercise

NOTE: My dear friend and mentor, brilliant Garden Nursery School director Jenn Guptill, co-presented this exercise with me back in 2004, when we taught workshops in supporting young children’s conflict resolution for fellow early childhood educators. A-D might be a product of the Safe and Caring Classrooms study group in which we participated, and then we added the E…

-Ask for volunteers to roleplay two characters in a contextually relevant problematic scenario

-These volunteers will play out an encounter in which they address the scenario

-Then they will see what happens when they try out steps A-E

A. Ask neutrally if there is a problem

-Do not assign blame, characterize someone as bad, or assume malicious intent; speak about how things look to you: ”I notice that when I do X, it seems like you do Y.”

-Use “I statements,” explaining how behaviors (NOT the person, just certain acts) they make you feel: “When you do X, it makes me feel like Y.”

-Invite other person to share his/her perspective: ”What do you think is happening?” “What do you think about that?” “What have you noticed?”

B. Brainstorm possible solutions to the conflict

-Both parties ideally should contribute to the brainstorming session

-Ideas should be heard and, ideally, not criticized

-The point is to establish trust and step away from putting people on the defensive

C. Choose which solution you will employ and how you will follow up to assess

-Both parties should agree to the action plan

-The assessment part is key — how will you know if things are working? When will you check in again to ensure that there’s satisfaction and open dialogue?

D. Do it!

-Get ‘er done

E. Evaluate

-This part is often left out but it allows for minor adjustments, guards against strained relations and icy silence/alienation post-confrontation, and renews awareness of/commitment to the solution (because it can be easy to fall back into old habits)

  • Play for Problem-solving Activity

-Break into small groups of 5-6, work through a problematic scenario by using a mode of play

Modes of play:

1. examples from nature — think about plants, animals, etc and see if that helps you to model and problem-solve

2. roleplaying — think about the characters involved in a problem and step into their shoes, act like them and try to think like them in order to problem-solve

3. manipulatives — use assorted objects to model systems and relationships

4. art — express problem, using as few words as possible, via paper, markers, Post-Its, and other art supplies

5. narrative — turn the problem into a simple story, as if you were explaining to a young child or an alien from another planet in order to boil it down to its most essential elements and make new discoveries

6. free play — find another playful mode of exploring your group’s problem!

Possible thematic outcomes:

1. innovation: new solutions

2. discovery: new skills or knowledge

3. personal and/or social enrichment: new relationships and/or intrapersonal understandings

4. other

Possible deliverables:

1. a way to communicate the problem so that the organization (and/or multiple stakeholders) better understand it

2. multiple possible solutions, a long brainstorm session

3. one processual solution and a set of action steps and recommendations for implementation and evaluation

4. an organizational restructuring involving new working groups or work flows or communication processes, etc.

5. other

  • Shareout

What did you come up with?
How did your group members work together (e.g., strategies, roles, conflicts, solutions, etc)?

-Reflections can be enriched by use of ORID (Stanfield, 2000), a protocol for facilitating group discussions that is based on four lines of inquiry: Objective (e.g., “What happened?”); Reflective (e.g., “How did it make you feel?”); Interpretive (e.g., “What is this all about?”); and Decisional (e.g., “What is our response?”).
O: What happened? Which words/phrases/moments do you most vividly remember?
R: How did it feel? Where were you surprised/delighted/frustrated?
I: What is all this about? What does all this mean for us? How will this affect our work? What are we learning from this? What is the insight?
D: What is our response? What action is called for? What are our next steps?

  • Epilogue: City Year L.A. Plays to Problem-solve!

This incredible group of open-hearted, fun-loving, forward-thinking folks enthusiastically embraced the challenge to approach organizational issues from a playful perspective. They harnessed modeling clay, blocks, animal figurines, toothpicks, gumdrops, a Barrel of Monkeys, and narrative form in order to think innovatively and develop viable solutions. Thanks to Shira Weiner for dreaming up and bringing in all of these creative materials, and for inviting me to City Year in the first place! C.Y.L.A., let’s play, hook!

Listen to this recording of the group members’ fantastic solutions!

Thank you for this opportunity and please keep in touch!