#Change11 Social artist and collective intelligence

I have enjoyed learning through Nancy’s slide here

In response to Nancy White’s call for exploration about Social Artist in the Community Week of MOOC, here I think an excellent way to engage with others would be through:

(a) polling of interests

(b) provision of multiple choice sort of “evaluation & assessment” if it is about prior skills and experience

(c) engaging the audience or your peers in the conversation by listening to their views, and asking questions

(d) encouraging individuals to reflect on what it means for them, for instance on the impact of technology on education, learning, or at work, or on their interests, hobbies etc.

(e) cultivating a sense of community and cooperation/collaboration through further activities or tasks of their choice, again through (a) to (d)

(f) creating or helping each other to create a community or learning environment based on conversation, interaction and multiple channels/networking, that is also based on meeting the needs of individual’s autonomy, and the community or institution.

This conference facilitated by Professor Michael Wade well illustrated how polling and engaging with the audience would create those conversation, and traction towards community building in the conference.  Perhaps, similar concepts could be applied in many synchronous Elluminate Session, by engaging and polling of ideas from the participants.  Stephen, George, Dave, Nancy and many facilitators have well demonstrated the power of such facilitation.  So this requires

(a) tools available from the synchronous tools – such as Elluminate/Blackboard

(b) a lot of planning and skills in the use of those tools and technology

(c) a topic of interests that would allow participants to contribute and share

(d) facilitation skills and mastery of the topic of interests by the facilitators

(e) a platform, such as a course (MOOC), or a conference (virtual or real face to face) or a workshop to demonstrate, and model, and to practise and reflect upon.

Also, such concepts on engaging and conversing with others could be applicable to Forum postings, Blog postings, Twitter connections, and many other means, like Youtube, Slideshare or Google Documents, Wiki cooperative writing etc.

I reckon that is the artistic part of social artist in a CoP or a community, where the artist becomes a leader or a steward, helping and supporting the community to grow and develop.

Here Stuart explains:

Healthy, thriving communities have social artists within them. Social artists are exceptional people. They may lead communities, they influence the tone of the communities they interact with, they invite and push people to learn and rethink. They are collaborative and wilful, idealistic and pragmatic.

What are some other “capabilities” and capacity required as a social artist?

Yes, the emotional intelligence, a passion towards working and learning with people as Nancy has shared here, and a passion for changes or towards leading changes, and leadership.

How about your favourite list of attributes of social artist?

Postscript: Matthias posted the picture in Google +.  Thanks to Matthias for posting.

Still need some time to think about the significance of networking here.

Knowledge in the connections? Or knowledge distributed throughout the connections.

I think there are 3 kinds of knowledge here: (1) knowledge as revealed by the blogger, as a critical and reflective learner, in form of “personal knowledge” as “integrated and curated” from his/her blog post and other posts/artifacts, as a broadcast/reflection/stimulus to conversation, (2) knowledge as the conversation (of the concepts behind, in critical thinking & analysis), and learning as distributed knowledge, or conversation), and (3) the emergent learning and knowledge, as a set of connections between nodes (revealing a pattern that consists of crystallization of thoughts and perceptions out of the minds, conversation of different nodes), and in these connections that knowledge could reside (as Stephen has elaborated).  I would also add that this would become a valuable “learning object” and artifact for the community or network to base upon,  in further knowledge exploration and building in networks.

What would be the role of the social artist among the nodes and networks?

8 thoughts on “#Change11 Social artist and collective intelligence

  1. Pingback: #Change11 Social artist and collective intelligence | E-Learning-Inclusivo | Scoop.it

  2. Pingback: #Change11 Social artist and collective intelligence « juandon. Innovación y conocimiento

  3. Pingback: Reflecting on #socialartists and #change11 | Full Circle Associates

  4. Hiya… catching up on comments tonight. I think you caught at lot of the #socialartist practices. As I was reflecting on my blog tonight, it seems that it is easier for use to talk about the practices, than about the social artist him or herself. Jim Groom as social artist is very different from Dave Cormier social artist — both are wonderful and very different. This led me to think that what we bring personally is particularly significant and harder to measure, evaluate, train etc. So there is as much “kismet” as there is design and practice, eh?

  5. Hi Nancy,
    Wonderful insight, yes, practice with social artistry. “What we bring personally is particularly significant and harder to measure, evaluate, train” Can social artistry be measured, evaluated? May be training could fill some of the skill gaps. I share your views that there is as much kismet as there is design and practice. Would such design be based on interaction, which could be emergent, in practice?

  6. I actually think there are elements of social artistry practices that could be evaluated in some way. When we look at how we understand the community aspect of communities of practice (in the domain, community, practice rubric) certainly you could talk about some of the practices as social artistry.

    That said, I bet the term “social artist” doesn’t pass the sniff test when people are talking monitoring and evaluation, but it works well when we are reflecting on our own practices. I think words trip us up here and the label, the metaphor, can be challenging from a more institutional perspective. I’m not sure. What is your experience of using that kind of language?

    On the training side, I shy back a bit. I tend not to use the word training for these sorts of practices (training for me is about repeatable, predictable things like filling out your time sheet!) I think watching others practice (role modeling), coaching, and reflecting on practice are what matter in building these skills and “radars” (i.e what if we reflected each week on the MOOC live sessions on what went well, what challenged us and more importantly, get the perceptions of the participants, particularly those who were quiet!)

    We can train ourselves with engaging methods. See http://www.kstoolkit.org but I don’t think we train for empathy or listening, we practice it and reflect upon it. Does that make any sense?

  7. Hi Nancy, I shared your view: metaphor can be challenging from a more institutional perspective. I see most institutions (especially those running on a business model) looking for pragmatism, as the model of education are evaluated and measured based on “smart” goals, metrics and key performance indicators. Even the NGOs are being run more with business in mind, as performance and outcome is what it counts. Back decades ago, when people were conceiving a “knowledge” nation, with “knowledge” worker, and where competency based training was launched and promoted, training did appear on the spot light. As you said, training is about repeatable, predictable things like filling out time sheet, following the exact procedures. At times, it could fall into a mechanistic way of training, where people just need to repeat the steps without much reflection of why and what could be done, in a better way. I am totally with you, in that watching, observing, and reflecting is a much better way of learning – as you suggested in a MOOC, and that is where the COP and LoP would be situated. Empathy or listening is based on practice and reflection, as you shared. They are the “diamonds” and the more you look at it, the more you like it. I have once reflected too that group session on emotional intelligence is of limited value, and so it is the practice and reflection which would make much deeper sense in developing personal emotional intelligence and social intelligence. Is that the essence of social artistry? Thanks so much for making me think and reflect more deeply on engaging methods, and the value of coaching and mentoring, and the sharing of valuable resources 🙂 Do you see social artistry based on pragmatism? John

  8. Pingback: #Change11 The Impact of Social media (Part 1) | Learner Weblog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s