The Agile Professor - Creating an Agile Learning Environment for Classrooms and Schools

BEST PRACTICE FOR SYNTHESIS AND CREATIVITY

The 21st century opens on humanity coming to terms with a spectrum of global concerns. If we view the earth as one country and mankind as it citizens then each step toward the future – the horizon of change – has to be integrated into specific local communities and at the same time the global community. Certainly this is not an easy or obvious process. The kinds of creativity and synthesis that are required challenge current forms of thinking and accepted behaviors. Viewed in relation to these challenges, profound changes in education (learning) and culture (behavior) are also required.

Given the vast changes in the world, and the shifting responsibility for education across the life span, Howard Gardner proposes in Five Minds For The Future the kinds of minds that will be at the greatest premium in this century and how best to cultivate them.

The mind must be DISCIPLINED in three senses. The person must be able to think in terms of the major scholarly disciplines (history, mathematics, science, and the arts); he/she must have at least one area of expertise; he/she must have those habits of continued application so that learning can continue throughout life.

Nobel laureate Murray Gell-Mann argues that in the 21st century, the most important mind will be the SYNTHESIZING MIND. Individuals are subjected to huge amounts of information. We must be able to decide what is important; how best to organize it for ourselves; how best to communicate it to others. Almost everything that can be automated will be.

The last frontier for the mind is that of CREATING New Ideas…. thinking outside of the box. Such thinking presupposes a certain discipline and considerable synthesizing ability but it cannot be constrained by what has been thought or done before.

The first three kinds of minds are cognitive. The last two relate to the world of other individuals, and are thus more social and affective.

The RESPECTFUL MIND goes beyond mere tolerance. Respectful persons welcome human diversity, seek to understand and work with others, and cultivate an atmosphere of openness and reciprocity.

The ETHICAL MIND builds upon respect but entails a more abstract attitude. Ethical individuals ponder their roles as workers and citizens. They carry out good work… work that is excellent, ethical and personally meaningful. They consider their roles as citizens of their community, their region, and the globe and act in constructive, non-egocentric ways.

Needless to say, the development of each of these kinds of minds is a formidable undertaking. There is a certain tension between these minds… for example, excessive respect can thwart creativity. Thus, getting these kinds of minds to work together is itself a challenge of synthesis.

The observations Howard Gardner makes in his book Five Minds For The Twenty First Century categorizes creativity in terms of the individual, the cultural domain, and the social field. He also looks at four stages of development in individual creativity and reflects on creativity in small, and large groups, as well as in crowds. He recognizes the relationship between synthesis and creativity and their importance in art, science, and business. However, he provides only general clues for the teaching of creativity and synthesis.

Agile Methods position synthesis and creativity in a process based methodology that contributes to end results. The Agile methods also bring diverse groups into a systematic structure that has capacity building effects on both the group and the individual participants. Daily stand up meetings, demonstrations and reflections at the end of each sprint serve to accumulate the learning from the experience of being creative. There is a unique aspect to creativity in that it is not so much an objective or prescriptive condition as one that is participatory and unpredictable. These features of the nature of creativity are in effect outward manifestations of an inward process that is essentially synthesis. The two attributes-synthesis and creativity- are in a dynamic, reflexive relationship…within the group and within each individual in the group.

The Learning Circle is unique in that it provides an evaluation tool that can be applied to the processes as well as the end results of synthesis and creativity as they manifest in a specific project.

I asked David if he would post this piece - instead he gave me permission to do so. I thought it was a very creative piece of work.

Read and enjoy:

” I’m no expert, but I have an idea which might help other Scrum teams who are struggling with a giant backlog.” -David Sabine
Background Information:

• A needs assessment was performed at our College about 20 months ago (prior to my arrival in this job) and the consultant identified 120 deliverables which would comprise a full-featured “Web Portal” and provide all our stakeholders with the functionality they desire. These deliverables/ideas vary in scope and purpose — like ‘online enrolment’ to ‘Podcast/RSS feeds’ to ‘discussion forums’ to ‘online tuition payment’ — some are projects in and of themselves but others can be easily converted into “user stories” with bite-sized workloads. Hence, we’ve decided to call that needs assessment our “Product Backlog”.
• Our team was formed very recently. And because our team is forming within the confines of a very bureaucratic institution, we’ve appointed a Product Owner (our C.I.O.) and by circumstance he has not had time yet to study and prioritize those 120 items in our Product Backlog. He’s the person who has both the expertise and authority to keep our team focused but his responsibilities at the College go way beyond our little team; so I expect that we should help him maintain the Product Backlog as objectively as we can (if not objectively, then at least collectively).

So, what’s the problem exactly?

Well, according to Scrum’s rules, the Product Owner is supposed to inform the team of each item’s relative “value” (thus ordering the Product Backlog). But to expidite our process (we want to get started!) and to assist our Product Owner, I wondered if I could devise a reasonable method to distill the backlog and make the most valuable items rise out of the murk.

The activity (the solution):

Our team is 3 members + 1 product owner + 1 chicken (let’s call him a “primary stakeholder”). So, with the 5 people in the room I determined to:

1. Have the people line up aside each other - in order by their ‘length of employment at the College’. I knew that this would place my manager (our primary stakeholder) at one end of the line.
2. I handed him a stack of paper — 120 slips of paper with items from the ‘needs assessment’ printed in giant font.
3. I gave these instructions:For each slip of paper:
   1. pick up the paper and read the sentence.
   2. within 12 seconds, consider the statement carefully and answer this single question: “Do I know this task to be ‘impossible’ by this team at this time?” (That might mean technically/financially/politically impossible.)
   3. If ‘yes’ then discard the slip of paper face down and pick up the next.
   4. if ‘no’ or ‘I’m not sure’ then give the paper to the next person (who then performs the exact same instructions).

Some items made it through to the end. Many were discarded. That’s the whole idea.

Simple, right? Well, at the end of this routine we had temporarily eliminated about 80 items from the backlog. I say ‘temporarily’ because those items may still have value at a later stage in the project and we’ll have to revisit them of course.

But there were still too many items on the surface and I felt the we could whittle the pile further yet. I suggested we repeat the activity but alter the question slightly to: “Do I know this task to be ‘utterly trivial’ at this time?” We did and it worked.

In effect (and within only 24 minutes!) we had narrowed our pile from 120 to 12 and had eliminated all items that were either extremely difficult or totally useless. As well, an excellent fringe benefit I think, our primary stakeholder (my manager) has now had 12 seconds to contemplate each and every item in the backlog; until this week I believe he has had some difficulty understanding the gravity of the expectations set upon this team.

Then, with some discussion we were able to order those 12 by their relative “value” and, voila!, we have an effective Product Backlog.

While I may have bent Scrum’s rules a little, I believe that the activity was invaluable. Time will tell.

As we enter the 21st century with increasing levels of universal interdependencies, we need to provide tools to review and restructure educational systems. This is in order to provide a means for universal education. One of the means that would contribute to this process is the Agile method used in software development. This is partly because the Agile concepts are relatively straight forward, and in large part allow for continuous change to be integrated into a planning process.

Whatever measurement we finally use to frame an educational system it needs to provide for an increase in the capacities of the individual in an evolving relationship to those around themselves.

Structures of education vary across economic and social strata and from one nation state to another. Analysis of this variety is not always helpful in terms of developing models for success. In a sense what is measured is often more of the same, that is, one educational model in terms of another. Instead it may be helpful to measure educational systems against models that are not so specifically focused on educational objectives. Measuring against mechanical or factory methods may be useful in some respects and measuring against organic and ecological processes may be useful in other respects.

An Agile methodology is not usually understood as related to an educational process. Rather, the Agile methods are applied to organizational structures usually in terms of some aspect of software development. However, along with creating a system for getting work done, there is an inherent learning structure that comes along with Agile methods. This learning is in terms of teamwork that is independent from the project requirements. Within this team development learning occurs in a variety of ways and at levels that we are not used to measuring. While efficiency is measured in terms of the time it takes to get work completed and passing tests, the learning related to team work may not be so easy to get a grip on even if it is deeply felt.

Agile methods can be used for developing a learning environment that evolves as it is applied to large or small-scale projects. Certainly, alternative processes for a whole or universal system of education are difficult to entertain without the weight of past experience imposing serious and well-intended limits and constraints on the development of that process. The last hundred years show how difficult it is to break out of any particular system and view it from a new angle. Traditions with cultural habits and current knowledge with very rich detail to draw upon both present resistances to change.

The current acceleration of climate change in itself presents an inescapable and urgent requirement for change of educational systems. The simple fact is that universal education presents an exponential increase in human resources that are ultimately the means for an intelligent evolution of global action. If Agile methods will help in that intelligent evolution why not use them?

[Note from Mishkin: This video underscores the need for dynamic or agile educational systems: http://dotsub.com/films/didyouknow20/]

Symbiotic Learning between the team and the individual.

After being with Mishkin for a three day Scrum training I saw the possibility of using the backlog as a model for a review of coursework. As the instructor or product owner of the course I bring to the class a backlog of requirements. When the class acts as a team they can be seen as participating in a series of sprints that make up a project. The project is the completed course.

This is an outline of steps taken to try out that possibility.

The first step was to arrange seating around a table long enough for each person to be seated comfortably with writing materials. This is comparable to a collocated team.

The second step was to outline the purpose of the session as the learning part modeled by the Learning Circle. The Learning Circle presents a sequence of Action, Reflection, Learning, and Planning carried out in terms of guidance.

http://www.agileadvice.com/archives/2006/04/connecting_voca.html

The Action part of the Learning Circle can be compared to the sprint activities and the Reflection part of the learning circle is comparable to the demo and retrospective in the sprint.

The third step was to have the team list each of the main elements that were worked on in the class through the semester. There were ten Media Activities, ten Movies analyzed, and six Handouts. Each of these elements could be compared to a sprint.

The fourth step was to have each person spend between one and two minutes to write what he or she had learned from the first of these elements. After finishing the writing in this time-boxed manner these thoughts were shared with the group. This simple process was used for each of the twenty-six elements that composed the main features of the course work in the semester.

The fifth step was to remind the individuals to take notes and to recognize the learning that is acquired through having the team focus however briefly on the whole of the course in terms of each of the main elements. This is to indicate the symbiotic relationship between the individual and the team.

There was excellent feedback from students after this exercise.

It may be that after a demo and a retrospective the team would benefit from such an activity as outlined above in order to make what was learned more evident to each individual, including the product owner and Scrum Master. This kind of review of each of the pieces of a backlog would take some time when applied in terms of either a finished sprint of a completed project. The results would be of benefit to the team as they advance into the next sprint or whole project with increased understanding of each other and the work.

NEXT: a mapping of the Learning Circle and a sprint/project.

One way of setting the table (quick) is for our selves, another way (flowers) is for a loved one, another is for the routine (place settings) family meal, another way (spectacle) is for guests, and another way (random) for parties. Each form reveals an intention and provides insight into felt relationships between all the things and processes, the person who makes the placements, and the responses of the people at the meal.

The description or definition of a type of relationship between objects/processes is in itself a new class of relationship between those same objects/processes. This is a form of relationship that is derived from the participant/observer. This form and the evolution of the form may be understood as learning.
Another example:

First: I have students bring three or four objects from home to paint in primary colors including white and black. The purpose is to develop a pair of tondo (round) paintings from a still life.

Second: I put a blank canvas on the model stand, 6 feet by 4 feet, and have students place the painted objects (12) one after another in turns until there are twelve objects on the surface.

This step has three parts, the first is to move one object of the twelve into a better configuration with the rest. Taking turns the students then move two of the objects to sweeten the relationships between all the objects. They are then instructed to move two objects and subtract one from the surface if desired. Another person with their turn can bring back an object someone else has removed. The configuration of ten to twelve objects is now complete. It is a 3D configuration or sculptural setting.

Third: The next step is to draw lines of force between the objects on the surface of the canvas. Each person using a charcoal goes in turn. Two turns are used to draw these relationships with any kind of line that serves.

Fourth: Then we remove all the objects. What remains is a drawing on canvas that is unique in itself. The drawing refers to the objects that were once on the canvas but is now an object in its own right.

Fifth: Have each person place a dot where they believe the center of the drawing is. Then to place four marks on the perimeter that would be where the circle would be if it were to be painted on a tondo form.

Sixth: After these points are set down we replace the objects that had been removed. They are placed in a new way, keeping in mind the sculptural relationship between the objects and the drawing in charcoal that is on the canvas.

Seventh: After the colored objects have been placed and shifted for better relationship in a similar way to the first cycle of placements a final piece of drawing is done. Each person has a chance to draw a complete circle around the objects in any way they choose. This completes the process of building a still life.

Eighth: Realize the objective of painting two tondo forms from two vantage points 180 degrees from each other. Zoom in if need be and paint a detail of the still life or zoom out to get everything on the model stand.

The process is reviewed and discussed with the students in order to help them understand the flexibility of change and how the relationships between objects can be described by the lines which in turn establish a new order of relationships.

The conclusion is in effect that: to describe or define a relationship between objects will probably require a new arrangement of relationships between those same objects.

You can see how the drawing elements show a relationship from a former placement between the objects as the lines would normally touch the objects. Now the objects are placed a second time and the drawing exists as a separate entity equal in its influence to any of the objects.

This is something we all do when we set the table for a meal.
In this exercise the drawing or lines are comparable to words as descriptions of relationships. The description or definition of a type of relationship between objects/processes is in itself a new class of relationship between those same objects/processes. This is a form of relationship that is derived from the participant/observer. Over time this form reveals an evolution of relationships. This evolution may be understood as a form of learning.