Some time ago, I joined a small knitting group from a small church where we began knitting small squares for the smallest of all members. This blanket is intended for a babe who shares a name with one of my own.

It was a few months of collaborative effort with novice and bordering-on-expert knitters alike.

Each stitch labored over in love, happiness, companionship, and generosity,

standing as a testament to the adage “many hands make light work”.

It has been sent off today, where it will soon be placed in the hands of a new mother to wrap around her son.

I will miss having the blanket around, as it was, for me, a symbolic thread connecting me to the amazing group women of which I was so grateful to have been a part. Thank you, ladies, for all of your kindness and compassion. I am sad to be far away from all of you.

And many blessings, little one, on your special day. May these stitches shield you from the cold and offer comfort in the years to come.

Overwhelmed that a photo of the Iqaluit cemetery taken from Happy Valley looking out over Koosejee Inlet in October 2002, can travel so far because of the initiative of Sep and Jonathan, two cyber citizens who have created Art 2.0: a collaborative art form linking (and hyperlinking) art, technology, consciousness . . .

Their methodology was impeccable, including dozens of collaborators through a series of courteous and informative emails that described the step-by-step process.

The final result is mind-boggling.

They provided the customized url for the image of pages on which the work of each contributor is shown:

They also provided a link to the Amazon site where the book itself is on sale at a very low price considering the high quality of the book design and its unique format which is a harbinger of a Art 2.0.

I am grateful they trawled Flickr and found a fragment of my own narrative . . .

Hi Maureen!

After nearly 3 years of hard work we are so very happy to announce that We Feel Fine: An Almanac of Human Emotion is in stores starting today. You should all be receiving your books within the next few weeks, but we hope that you will take a sneak peek next time you’re at your local bookstore. Copies should be on the shelves of bookstores nationwide in the United States.
If you live within the Unites States, your complimentary copy of the book will be shipped out today or tomorrow. If you live outside of the US we will be shipping your book next week and it may take some extra time to get to you. Thank you all for being so patient and it shouldn’t be too much longer until you have it in your hands.

We also hope that you will spread the word and perhaps include the exciting news in your facebook status or on your blog. We will be posting the simple: “We Feel Fine book in stores today! http://bit.ly/wffbook)” in our facebook/twitter as well.

As we have said before we honestly couldn’t have done this without all of you and so on today of all days would like to send you all our sincerest gratitude. For me, personally, I have had an incredible time working on this book and a huge part of that has been reading your blogs. Thanks for everything. Best, Sep

http://wp.me/p1TTs-ju

I have often wondered whether to use Office Live, or not! I tried it a couple of years ago with my Yr10 pupils and it just didn’t work for them. They would not upload stuff on the share workspace and some complained they couldn’t access the resources I uploaded, or could not log in. So, I gave up for a season, until a few months ago when I created a PowerPoint Template for my Yr 12 Students to use to create a massive mind map on various aspects of Quantum Phenomena and EM Radiation. I designed the template using PPTplex, a PowerPoint plug-in that allows you to view your slides as if they were part of a canvas. You can then use the buttons and scroll on your mouse to zoom in and out of each slide (see my previous blog about it)

The result was that each pupil in yr 12 was assigned a topic and turn that into a mind map on a single slide. Thanks to the zooming features of PPTplex there was no concern about the font size and students could, therefore, fit as much information as they wanted in their mind map. Each slide was a new central concept within a much larger mind map whose template I designed in the background view to include all the pupils’ slides and show how each topic linked with each other! This way they could all work at the same mind map presentation and that saved the hassle to have to collect all their work and paste it in a single presentation afterwards. In addition, it allowed the students to use the amazing features of Office 2007, like smart arts and PPTplex and create really nice and visual mind maps!

So, did it all work so smoothly? Well, we live in the real work! I already knew about the problem of not being able to work simultaneously on the same file. If someone is currently working on one file another user can only open it as a read only. This takes away all the collaborative nature of sharing documents online, doesn’t it? No doubt, tools like Google Docs and Google Wave allow a much superior real time collaboration, but the tools provided by Google Presentations are quite limited compared to the range of features of PowerPoint 2007, which allows the user to create much more versatile and professional looking presentations, as example of which is PPTplex. Some students could not download the Presentation and work on it and one pupil experienced the frustration of not being able to edit the presentation because another student was working on it at the same time. Thankfully, he was quick enough to think of saving it with another name, make his changes and then cut and paste onto the Office Live shared presentation later.

So, is Office Live a useless online collaborative environment? I believe it’s far from that, because of the reasons I explained above. If they could merge the awesome features of Office 2007 with the collaborative power of Google Docs, or even better, Google Wave, that would come close to perfection. But we live in the real world where live can sometimes mean “wait a minute I am rebooting” and collaboration sometimes means “Well you both wrote on the same spot, so I won’t show any of it at all!”

What so you think? Please, leave a comment!

  This week I learned about some barriers that impede action in schools.  These barriers are very true from my experience as an educator in schools, and I’ve appreciated learning about how to overcome them.  The reading this week was from On Common Ground.  One barrier was on page 246; a focus on attitudes as a barrier.  I think negative attitudes are one of the most common and hard to control barriers that exist.  Teachers have negative attitudes regarding the amount of work that goes into goals, the practicality of these goals, the effectiveness of goals, etc.  These attitudes result in no real change in student learning, and hence, they are correct, it turns into busy work.  You have to make your meaningful and effective in order to see results.  They don’t realize that their own attitudes are a self-fulfilling prophecy for their own complaints.    One way to overcome these barriers is to create PLCs in school so that they have ownership in the goals created.  This will allow them to have a voice and feel they are part of the solution, instead of just being given this goal from the administration. I definitely think PLCs would do wonders for the negative attitudes at our school.

Q.15 Personalisation

I am pro web based personalisation because I believe that it has the ability to deliver dynamic, customised, and relevant content to the website visitor, through the visitor’s web page or email.

Personalisation finds and delivers information to the consumer that goes beyond the use of search engines, whereby users need to know what they are looking for, but studies show that just 2% of what users actually know comes from a direct search; the rest comes through passive means, by monitoring our environments, browsing and staying aware.

How does personalisation benefit the retailer and the consumer?

Typically what we see on the web for personalisation is a technology called collaborative filtering. Collaborative filtering depends heavily upon user ratings and users going around and rating different things, especially on ecommerce websites such as Amazon.  

Amazon uses the collaborative filtering techniques; cross-selling and up-selling, in order to deliver personalised content to the customer. Cross-sell models predict the probability or value of a current customer buying a different product or service from the same company (cross-sell). Up-sell models predict the probability or value of a customer buying more of the same products or services.

On Amazon, the personalisation starts for me as soon as I have signed in to the website. Under the “Today’s Recommendations For You” area of my personalised homepage, I clicked the product in the “New for You” area which was the Microsoft Windows 7 operating system.

Amazon.co.uk-Recommended For You

Below is the collaborative filtering/data mining techniques that I see after I have scrolled down the page.

Amazon.co.uk-Up-selling and cross-selling

The up-selling technique used displays a second product, Microsoft Office 2007 that Amazon believes will compliment the product that I am interested in buying. If I actually wanted to buy both items, this system benefits me, as the consumer, by eliminating the repetitive task of going through the purchasing and transaction process twice. It also suggests a product that I am interested in buying, that I might not have actively thought about buying until I saw it appear beside the original item. For the retailer they gain an extra sale, where they would otherwise have only made the one sale.

The cross-selling technique used tells me what percent of other Amazon users bought this item after viewing it, which gives me two other versions of the operating system along with the currently viewed item and Microsoft Office 2007, which was used in the up-selling technique above. This model gives me, the consumer, similar products of interest which I might want to buy instead, or that I just want to use to compare against. For the retailer this may result in the sale of another product that the user may not have otherwise even looked at had they decided not to buy the original item that was being viewed.

With collaborative filtering, the recommender is not able to handle items until they have been ranked by a minimum number of customers; furthermore, the recommendation capabilities are poor if the medium storing the product ranks is fairly bare, because in that case it is difficult to identify customers having tastes similar to those of the current one. To overcome these issues personalisation is being innovated a lot further from what collaborative filtering has done.

The next generation of personalisation uses a behavioural model, because it’s not what user says that’s important; it’s what they do that matters.

Next Generation Personalisation

Humans do not make decisions without knowledge or input. We influence each other and are influenced by the groups, communities, and networks in which we participate. Every decision we make affects our own personal experiences as well as the experiences of those around us. Next generation personalisation uses this idea to drive the importance of socialisation in personalisation in our networks.

Technology should not finish at the interface layer; it should be pushed forward so that consumers have great online experiences. The interface should support the technology with more information about consumer behaviour. This is the feedback loop being utilised by the creators of the next generation of personalised content delivery platforms.

It is the next generation of personalisation engines which I am in favour of more so.

Web 3.0 is about recommendation and personalisation

Chronique de l’usage empirique d’un testeur bêta.
Même dans les années 80, j’avoue ne pas avoir accroché immédiatement à cette évolution musicale, alors, pensez au XXIème  siècle. Vous l’avez compris, je ne vais pas vous entretenir de mes goûts musicaux sur ce blog qui ne présentent guère d’intérêt, mais de la nouvelle plateforme de communication “révolutionnaire”, écrivent certains; Google Wave.

Dés lors que mon Gmail m’avais notifié mon invitation, je m’empresse de cliquer sur le lien pour découvrir la bête et… “Bon, je suis censé faire quoi ?” je me demande en découvrant l’interface. Fan de BD, de Bandes dessinées aussi mais surtout du blog de Benoit Descary, je tombe sur une foule de ses billets, grâce à une recherche google, qui m’expliquent un peu par quel bout commencer.

Ne comptez pas sur moi pour vous expliquer ce à quoi peut vous servir Google Wave si vous êtes particulier ou professionnel, je n’en sais encore rien moi même, bien que j’exploite Google Docs à des fins professionnels. Il ne s’agit, ici, juste que d’un billet d’humeur et, en aucun cas, didactique.

Ma première impression, au moment du projet et des premières rumeurs sur le web, était que google avait trouvé le saint graal pour associer en une seul interface tous les services qu’il propose en ligne. Je me suis dit Facebook n’a qu’à bien se tenir. Un service à la manière d’un réseau social à qui on ajouterait une foule d’applications du type face-de-bouc que j’avais, un temps, apprécié après avoir délaissé Orkut, service Google, dont je n’arrivais à déterminer l’intérêt, en tous cas, pour moi. Pour d’autres raisons, j’ai fini par supprimer mon compte Facebook, malgré mes quelques “amis” en me tournant vers twitter qui a le mérite d’être clair et direct.

C’est, en premier, le site français Zorgloob qui m’a aidé à me faire une opinion sur cette plateforme. Après avoir découvert les premiers usages que je pouvait en avoir, j’ai également appris qu’il existait déjà des clients desktop pour Mac et Windows/Linux (sous Adobe Air). Ce qui tend à démonter que les développeurs croient à l’expansion de cette plateforme signée Google.

Wave prétend revolutionner la communication en allant au delà du courriel, bien. Sachant que Gmail est le 3ème Webmail dans le Monde après Yahoo mail et Hotmail (grâce à Msn, j’imagine), on peut peut-être en comprendre l’enjeu d’autant que cela reste l’activité principale par internet.

Les navigateurs “compatibles” Google Wave sont, pour l’instant : Opéra, Safari 4, Firefox 3.5 et inévitablement, Chrome, parce que gérant le Htemele5. Il existe aussi de nombreuses extensions (dont certaines finiront par être payantes par le biais d’une AppStore) et des add-ons firefox. Francis Pisani de Transnet essaie de déterminer dans un article l’objectif de la société Google au travers de cette plateforme qui est “un carrefour entre le courriel, le réseau social, la messagerie instantanée, l’IRC et Twitter” (rien que ça)  selon Framasoft, qui s’interroge, quant à lui, pour savoir si elle est “une bonne nouvelle pour le logiciel libre ?”… Bon, sinon, de manière plus ironique, il y a aussi les points de vue du meilleur blog actuel et de Laurent Bourelly.

Bref, mon approche perplexe de Google wave m’a beaucoup fait utiliser le moteur de recherche Google. Je tâtonne, pour l’instant, en découvrant les différents usages potentiels, notamment par le biais des bots, des gadgets et surtout l’enrichissement de ma liste contacts pour pouvoir démarrer un projet collaboratif. Une proposition d’usage, par exemple, faite par le profgeek pour le monde de l’éducation.

Au moment où la société Google semble s’orienter vers le “cloud computing” avec ses OS (Androïd, gOs, Chrome Os…) et ses Google Apps (web,netbooks, téléphonie mobile) pour séduire les grands comptes. Alors que Mozilla planche sur la “messagerie universelle” Raindrop. Alors que quelques suggestions sur le blog “idées” de Goggle mettent en avant “quelques manques”

Comment voyez vous l’avenir de ce genre de plateforme collaborative et pensez vous l’utiliser activement au delà de la simple curiosité?

Edit : En ce qui me concerne, je doute que les enseignants avec qui je travaille s’impliquent dans ce genre d’outil (et que dire des élèves de primaire que j’encadre) qui demandent tout de même un temps d’adaptation. De plus, il est tout à fait possible d’activer des fonctionnalités labs dans Gmail, voire de l’enrichir des services Google, grâce à l’add-on Firefox; Integrated Gmail ou plus simplement par Google Shortcuts pour le même navigateur pour accéder à un condensé des services Google au même endroit. Donc, je pense voir à l’usage si cette plateforme qui, sans dénigrer son potentiel, m’amène à changer vraiment mes habitudes de travail et vous ferai part d’un véritable retour d’expérience.

Au delà de ces questions, il ne faut pas perdre de vue qu’il s’agit d’une “preview” qui n’est pas exempte de bugs, notamment liés au nombre de contributeurs d’une wave.

Pour avoir une idée des points positifs et négatifs répertoriés par Google, je vous invite à lire le billet de Camille Jourdain. Cela étant, il me reste 16 invitations. Si vous êtes intéressés pour tester Google Wave et/ou contribuer à la wave publique : Google wave et l’éducation, faites en simplement la demande par commentaire… ou alors, adhérez au mouvement anti-Google Wave.

]]> http://informationvalet.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/midwest-newspapers-anti-up-30k-to-eye-for-profit-collaborative-to-monetize-internet-content/ Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:52:37 +0000 mediagiraffe http://informationvalet.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/midwest-newspapers-anti-up-30k-to-eye-for-profit-collaborative-to-monetize-internet-content/ http://coligane.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/the-patient-empowered-with-power-comes-responsibility/ Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:19:27 +0000 Olivier LAURENT http://coligane.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/the-patient-empowered-with-power-comes-responsibility/ http://synocracy.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/what-is-synocracy/ Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:57:15 +0000 Alan D. Price, PhD http://synocracy.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/what-is-synocracy/

Barbara Marx Hubbard, long regarded, by some individuals, as one of the world’s leading futurists, has defined the term, Synocracy, as:

…Synergistic Democracy…an emergent form of self-governance….the next stage of democracy in which each person has the opportunity to express his or her creativity for the good of the self and the whole. It is a form of governance that facilitates all citizens in finding their unique potential and where best to express it within the whole. It leads toward a cocreative society in which all people are free and responsible to do and be their best. [Emphasis added].

Synergistic is the adjectival form of “synergy” (from Greek sunergia,  cooperation).  Synergistic (synergic), thus, means “acting together,” or “working together in a creative, innovative, and productive manner” (from Greek sunergētikos).

Timothy Wilkin, MD, writing in an 2004 article, stated that “Barbara Hubbard originally coined the term Synocracy to refer to a not yet defined future system of ‘rule by the people’ in a co-Operative society.”   Dr. Wilkin also reported that Barry Carter, the author of Infinite Wealth, claimed that he had independently created the term, Synocracy.  Carter, quoted by Wilkin, wrote on his own behalf:

Barbara Marx Hubbard created the term synocracy. Having never read her book, I independently created the synocracy concept by way of mass privatization. When people are owning partners in a mass privatization organization they must participate because owners operate on profit and loss. As mass privatization communities work together we move beyond representative democracy and even beyond consensus democracy to create synergy-ocracy and synthesis-ocracy or synocracy. Infinite Wealth shows mass synocracy to be the new system of social order for the Information Age to replace representative democracy. It even replaces the notion of government with the broader notion of social order. Just as learning is driven internally where education is driven externally representative government is external and where as self-organizing mass synocracy is internally driven [Emphasis added].

Dr. Wilken observes:

In today’s world…it is assumed without question that majority rule democracy is the best way to organize humanity. To even offer a criticism…is to invite an immediate and often emotional charged attack on oneself. We are quickly asked to choose between majority rule democracy or the dictatorships of communism/fascism. We are quickly reminded that if we don’t like it here in a majority ruled democracy, we are free to leave….

Majority rule democracy in its purest form was found in the Ancient Greek city-states and Early Roman Republic, these were direct democracies in which all citizens could speak and vote in assemblies. This was possible because of the small size of the city-states almost never more than 10,000 citizens. However, even these Ancient democracys [sic] did not presuppose equality of all individuals; the majority of the populace, notably slaves and women, had no political rights at all. So even here the majority really did not rule.

In modern representative democracies we find the majority rule mechanism used to select our representatives, to make decisions within committees and to make decisions within the legislative bodies, however careful analysis reveals we really have rule by the few….

In today’s “FREE” world all political decisions are made using majority rule democracy. The the group deciding may be small—a committee faced with solving some particular problem, or large—the entire voting electorate of a nation choosing a President. Regardless of the size of the group deciding, decision is made when one faction within the group achieves a simple majority. That faction wins the minority faction loses. Majority rule consensus requires only a simple majority to force the minority—the losing voters to accept the position of the majority—the winning voters. There is no need to gain the agreement of all of the members. There is no need to prevent the minority from losing [Emphasis added].

When one looks at the evolution of systems of governance, it becomes clear that, over the course of recorded history, humankind has moved from autocratic, adversarial forms of force and control  (dictatorship, rule by one, or oligarchy, rule by a few), to majority rule democracy (“rule by the most”), and finally to modern representational democracy, which we find has devolved back to “rule by the few.”

The Relationship Continuum

According to Wilkin, “all human choices and all human relationships can be described as falling on a continuum,” viz.,

Adversity – Neutrality – Synergy

 Wilkin defines an “adversary [or adversarial] relationship” to be:

…any relationship wherein the participants are less happy, less effective and less productive than they would be without the relationship. An adversary choice is any choice that reduces the happiness, effectiveness, and productivity of the participants in the relationship. The sum of the whole relationship in terms of happiness, effectiveness, productivity, profitability, satisfaction, etc. is less than the sum of the parts – less than the sum of the individual’s ability to be happy, effective, productive, profitable, satisfied, etc. outside this relationship.

He defines a “neutral relationship” to be:

…any relationship wherein the participants are equally happy, equally effective, and equally productive as they would be without the relationship. A neutral choice is any choice that has no effect on the happiness, effectiveness, and productivity of the participants in the relationship. The sum of the whole relationship in terms of happiness, effectiveness, productivity, profitability, satisfaction, etc. is equal to the sum of parts – equal to the individuals’s  (sic) ability to be happy, effective, productive, profitable, satisfied, etc. outside this relationship.

And, finally, Wilken defines a “synergic relationship” to be:

…any relationship wherein the participants are more happy, more effective, and more productive than they would be without the relationship. A synergic choice is any choice that increases the happiness, effectiveness, and productivity of the participants in the relationship.  The sum of the whole relationship in terms of happiness, effectiveness, productivity, profitability, satisfaction, etc. is more than the sum of the parts – more than the sum of the individual’s ability to be happy, effective, productive, profitable, satisfied, etc. outside this relationship. 

Compared to the rule by the one of dictatorship,  the rule by the most  of majority rule democracy, appears to be a much fairer way. And fairness is perhaps the greatest value of our American nation.  However, it should now be clear to the reader that while Neutral political-economic systems are better for humanity than Adversary political-economic systems. Majority rule democracy is really an Adversary political-economic system pretending to be a Neutral political-economic system. In reality only lip service is given to rule by the most.

The Evolution of Democracy

Dr. Wilkin in his essay Beyond Democracy, has concluded:

What we really have in America, the “freest nation on Earth”, is rule by the few. And, while rule by the few holds some advantage over rule by the one, its advantage does not imply there is nothing better for Humanity.

If we are to find a synergic form of organization for humanity, we will have to look beyond the representive (sic) democracies of today.

Barbara Marx Hubbard has provided the conceptual underpinning for imagining the outcome of Wilkin’s “look beyond.”

The context for the evolution of democracy is the New Story of Creation, cosmogenesis, the discovery that the universe is an interconnected whole system that has been unfolding and transforming for billions of years. This unfolding is always toward higher consciousness and greater freedom through more complex order, and it continues now through us. From atom to molecule to cell to animal to human, and now to a Self-actualized humanity, we are becoming a complex planetary system, always through greater cooperation, connectivity, and synergy [Emphasis added].

This is a multi-billion year trend!  Synergy, the coming together of separate parts to form a whole system greater than the sum of its parts is not idealistic; it is a fundamental tendency in nature.

She quotes from the writing of evolutionary biologist, Elisabet Sahtouris:

Type I ecosystems are populated by aggressive species establishing their niches through intense, sometimes hostile, competition for resources and rapid population growth, while the species in Type III ecosystems tend toward complex cooperative or collaborative systems in which species feed or otherwise support each other to mutual benefit. The Type IIs generally lump together various “transitional” ecosystems. It seems reasonable to ask where the “more advanced” species that can build stable final communities “come from.” How did they evolve? Logically, there must have been a time when only pioneer species existed, yet somehow evolution led to the existence of mature, cooperative species” (Vision in Action, vol. 3, Number 1, 2005) [Emphasis added].

Hubbard concludes:

The human species as a whole has barely reached Type II.  We are in transition as a species toward greater cooperation. The growing threat of self-destruction through domination, control, and self-centeredness is a mighty evolutionary driver that is awakening millions of people within our immature species to move toward more cooperative action. Therefore, one of our fundamental efforts must be to develop processes to cultivate social synergy wherever we can [Emphasis added].

Thus, we can say that the term, synocracy represents the form of governance toward which “cosmogenesis” is slowly (at least from the human view) but relentlessly progressing.

I am very grateful to the volunteers and sponsors (Elluminate, Jay Cross, George Siemens, Tony Karrer and Harold Jarche, to name just a few) who made the Learntrends 2009 online conference such a success. For three days, the number of participants never dipped much below 150 and the amount of side-chatter in Elluminate and Twitter was overwhelming. In fact, a lot of the learning occurred in the side chatter so participants deserve a round of applause for their sharing too.

The Learntrends online conference wrapped up three days ago but, already, I’m having a hard time remembering anything specific that I learned. It’s my own fault – I didn’t take notes and I multitasked my way through many of the discussions.

Well, okay, maybe I did learn that learning is impeded by not taking notes and by multitasking. Seriously, though, I’m sure that I did learn a lot. It’s just that the learning is not readily accessible for regurgitation on demand. Instead it takes the form of notions that I will test later for corroboration at the proverbial water cooler or cocktail party.

For instance, I will take my key notion from Learntrends – “Corporate learning is moving toward collaborative and self-directed education” – and I will promote it to a personal opinion in discussions with associates who have little orientation to workplace learning. How that opinion is received will direct my next steps in learning about the subject.

• Indifference will dampen my enthusiasm for further proselytizing with that particular audience or application
• Challenges to my opinion will send me back to sources for support.
• Interest and enthusiasm will spur me to focus more sharply on specific aspects and applications, and to learn more deeply.

Such is the nature of informal learning. And social media marketing – the lines are blurring.

This week was a week of new learning for me.  I feel that I have learned so much about different ways we as professionals can collaborate and communicate. This week we learned about Lesson Studies and Critical Friends groups.  According to Professional Development: What Works, page 226, a Critical Friends Group, CFG, meets once a month for about 3 hours and is comprised of about 6-10 teachers.  They meet and discuss problems, goals, results, and adjustments needed.  Critical friends groups need to be clearly focused, with a diffused power system where everyone is equal.  There is no leader, but rather a list of protocols that everyone needs to follow.  There needs to be trust so people can feel comfortable taking risks, because if risks are taken true learning will most assuredly take place.  I think critical friends groups would be really beneficial for my school because there are very clear cliques formed and not a lot of communication between the entire staff.  This would force people in a positive way to collaborate and trust each other.

I also liked learning about lesson studies.  I do feel they have to be done correctly because otherwise people will feel defensive and attacked.  One good thing about lesson studies is that there are other professionals that can help you problem-solve and plan for the kids you have in your class and the curriculum you are teaching.  It is directly beneficial to student learning.  I like how there is room for reflection and adjustments built into the plan, as this is a cyclical learning process.  The biggest challenge I see is the time and resources to get substitutes to have other teachers observe and time to discuss.

Of the two I think CFGs would be more beneficial for my school for the relational piece.  There is no substitutes required for teacher observation, so it costs the school district less.  It could be done on an early release Friday.  I think it is also important to create groups that have a mixed number of years teaching.

Check this out, it’s pretty cool!

.

http://www.inbflat.net/

.

A collaborative music project. Idea by Darren Solomon from Science for Girls.

(found at http://mywebspiration.com/)
I chose to start with this tool because I know that several faculty members use Inspiration with their students.  This tool is a web-based concept mapping application that was designed by the Inspiration folk.  It works in much the same way as Inspiration does and the interface is eerily similar.  For those of you who use Inspiration, you know how concept mapping can be used as a pre-assessment or as a post-assessment.  In fact, the Foundations bloc uses concept mapping as one of the final projects in their courses.  The bonus with using MyWebspiration is that it’s free and web-based.  This would allow students to work from home without downloading a trial copy of the software or paying $75 for a copy.  The other added bonus is that it allows for collaborative concept mapping.  Groups of students can concept map together is the same online space.  If you’re thinking of jumping in, you will need to set-up a username and password but the rest of the site is pretty easy to use.  I would think that folks with a moderate level of technology expertise could handle it with ease.

Networking groups are growth machines. The good ones assist in your business and your personal growth. In networking groups people of all skills and occupations come together to share information and to help each other.

There you will most likely find your mentors. A network of “go-to” people you can support you with what you need and are capable of serving as an informal group and as personal mentors.

Networking is not just about getting “leads,” it’s also about helping others. There are many learning opportunities if you are paying attention. The more you collaborate, the faster you will develop a trusting, long-term relationship. The rewards are obvious and many, and the risk is virtually non-existent. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by developing a collaborative mentor.

A networking mentor is someone with more business experience than you who serves as a trusted confidante over an extended period of time, often free of charge. Why do they do this? First and foremost as a way of giving back to their community and to society at large. It’s a two-way street. You learn from them and they learn from you. Usually this requires someone who is knowledgeable, compassionate, and possesses the attributes of a good teacher or trainer and who takes a personal interest in the mentoring relationship.

Collaboration is a recursive process where two or more people or organizations work together with common goals – for example, an intellectual endeavor that is creative in nature – by sharing knowledge, learning and building consensus with one another.

The collaborative method of interacting in groups is said to allow for full immersion into the process thereby helping all who are willing to share. Networking groups whose members really get that are the ones worthy of your attendance. They are designed to promote collaborative thinking that enhances your business and personal growth as well as encouraging collaboration with each other regarding business referrals.

You can collaborate in groups to solve business related problems. It can be interesting and fun. When it is, there is a connection and the sense of a shared goals. Collaborative group thinking often occurs only when you request it. Be a request for the assistant that you need. Being shy about asking can only limit your potential.

When you begin generating ideas and in trying to select the right ideas that work, you don’t need consensus, you need diversity of thought. This will allow your thinking to expand and will give you more than one idea to put into practice.

You can collaborate about job searches. According to BH Careers International, 80 percent of all available jobs are not formally posted. Landing a position is more easily accomplished through word of mouth networking. Tell people what you are looking for.

Networking demands relationship building. It’s a process and it can be a deceptively complex one. It must be strategic and focused and it takes time. Be patient. You cannot rush a close friendship.

No one gets to the top of the mountain alone. Why would we want to when the view is so much better when surrounded by friends? – Kristen Marie Schuerlein

When you share information intended to help someone else, you transcend all differences. Your own greatness expands with the collective power of the group.

Yes, it’s true. There are those to choose to keep their strategies close to the vest. Having said that, I watch for people like that and avoid them like the plague. It has been my experience that the more successful you are the more inclined to share what others need to know and ask you for.

It is important to mingle with people who are committed to understanding each others business goals, target markets and value statements in order to assist in marketing each others business through quality business referrals and assistance to each other. The synergy of the group is key to its success.

In networking you must have clarity of intention, faith, trust and a team of amazing people in your support group that are committed to sharing some of their secrets to success without reservation.

If there is no collaborative spirit in the group I recommend that you move on to another group. I have discovered that some of the very large networking events are often places where people – who know very little about networking – come to hand out a bunch of business cards and meet as many people as possible. There are so many people there that you cannot possibly have the time to truly develop a relationship, ask questions or offer assistance. Those who attend are so excited about all the people there that they become scattered in their efforts and end up with a ton of business cards on their desk and not much else.

These kind of groups are rampant with people who subscribe to the notion of “what’s in it for me.” In spite of what a networking group might call itself many business networks are little more than loose associations of companies who barely know each other – these are networking’s loose cannons – and have not invested in learning to collaborate with one another.

These kind of opportunistic business networks believe that when they make the first contract that will be time enough to learn to collaborate. Not! I look to see if the group is constantly forging new connections to enhance value for its members.

Networking is not about the quantity of people who attend, it is the quality. To get the most out of your networking experience, you need to build a relationship with people who you want to have contact with.

Opportunity isn’t always obvious. That’s why it is important to seek out and contribute to a networking group where each person gives willingly to the others. There you will find find something very powerful at work and a treasure of close business associates that know that contribution is what networking is all about.

Another supportive BLOG post: Read, “The Joy of Collaboration” by Ian Percy.

Copyright © 2009 – Larry James. Larry James is a Professional Speaker, Author and Coach. He presents networking seminars nationally and “Networking” coaching by telephone or one-on-one. His latest book is, Ten Commitments of Networking: Creative Ways to Maximize Your Personal Connections! Can’t find my book in your bookstore, order a signed copy from Larry James. Visit Larry’s “Networking HQ” Website; articles, tips, networking books and more!

NOTE: All articles and networking tips listed in this BLOG are available for reprint in magazines, periodicals, newsletters, newspapers, eZINEs, on the Internet or on your own Website. Click here for details.

Add Larry James to your Facebook page: http://www.Facebook.com/larry.james
Follow Larry’s “once daily” Relationship Tweet at: http://www.Twitter.com/larryjames
Follow Larry’s “Relationship BLOG” at: http://CelebrateLove.wordpress.com/

These papers were a team effort; each member of the various teams I was on contributed one or sometimes multiple sections of these essays. These essays were then edited for content, flow and a consistent voice to produce the final product. The topics include commercialism in schools and the Jena 6 Trials.

Collaborative Works