Teaching Through Research Workshop – Day 7

Our speaker today really hit home with me, in comparison the previous days, as her talk was non-discipline specific, but relevant to all. She talked about different learning theories (which is something I’m familiar with) and various innovative education initiatives. The overarching theme with all of them was that it was inclusive to everyone: tinkering workshops with children and adults, edible science/art instalments, materials sciences aimed at learning what your favourite musician is wearing (from their jewellery to their clothes). The message was that people need to see themselves in what it is that their learning; if the subject and the person are separate, there’s a disconnection that can hinder learning. Further to that, these things need to be accessible and available to everyone – not just a specific socio-economic demographic.

The latter portion of that message is very good, and perhaps something I can work towards, if I’m able to extend the GIS concept training programme I’m trying to build, but the first part of it is something I can apply. I need to make sure that the people who participate in my experiments, and help to form my case studies, are able to see the relevance of what they’re learning in their lives and that it is something they want to be a part of.

Teaching Through Research Workshop – Day 6

The thing I’ve been told about doing a PhD is that your ideas are often too big for one study; what you end up coming up with is 10 separate PhDs. Ultimately, you whittle it down to something much smaller than initially conceived; a PhD attempts to answer one tiny part of one small question, and you build from there. I thought I’d whittled it down enough, however, it seems I have a bit more to do.

We’ve now gotten to the part in the workshop that I was very much looking forward to: initial presentation and critique of the programs we’re trying to develop. I discussed the initial premise -that graduate level academics from various disciplines are interested in GIS, but don’t know how to properly use the technology. I discussed my idea – to teach them GIS concepts that are important to them to help expedite and support their use of GIS in their work. I showcased the technology – to use ArcGIS.com to allow people to explore layers, add them to a map, and tell a story with the map, and that this story would be individualistic to the groups I will teach, as part of my case studies. I told them about the other dimensions of the analyses – to see if this method of teaching can actually teach what it is I want to teach to graduate level researchers, to see if face-to-face works better than online, and to see if this can facilitate interdisciplinary thinking. The group thought all of this was interesting, but thought there was still too much going on. Their comments can be summed up as follows:

  • “Teaching GIS” is too big; take one small aspect of GIS and teach that (e.g. Map Projections)
  • What is taught needs to be comparable between the groups; if one case study is Anthropologists and you teach them one thing (e.g. Map Projections), and another case study is Computer Scientists and you teach them another thing (e.g. Raster vs. Vector), its not comparable because not only are the two groups different, but the topic is different as well.
  • The amount of time it will take to teach that aspect of GIS will vary depending upon the group’s level of skill with GIS, the task to be tackled, etc.; These will have to be accounted for and handled in order for the amount of time for the teaching exercise not to balloon, so again, keep the task clear, direct, and small.

So my research question needs to be a bit smaller. Taking it as it is (“How does a non-formal learning approach compare to an informal one when adult learners wish to learn GIS in interdisciplinary research?”) and thinking more critically about it:

  • “How does a non-formal learning approach compare to an informal one…” = How does a structured delivery compare to an experiential one…; what I want to know here is if the hunting-and-pecking way of going about things, as we often do, is better/worse for gathering information, as and when we need it, instead of sitting down and taking time to properly devote to gathering the information, with some guidance. We may end up with more than we think we need, but it may be useful later, and the person/material guiding us may be aware of this, so they save us the time of having to go back to re-gather the information. Does this give us the ability to solely focus on the learning task, rather than breaking our concentration? Do we end up doing things more efficiently this way?
  • “… when adult learners wish to learn…” = “wish to learn” is a leap… Some DON’T wish to learn; some are forced to pick something up – often by their higher ups. They may use it begrudgingly, just to tick the box and say they used it, but it doesn’t need to be that way. That thing may actually be something they may grow to like, and they may find it very useful in the end. So how can we shape the delivery of material such that we get through the “growing pains” phase as quickly as possible?
  • “… GIS…” = GIS is a BIG thing, so what part of it? This isn’t to say ArcGIS (a programme to teach people how to use a piece of software) or Geographic Information Science on the whole (a programme that would make someone as proficient in GIS as the specialist), but rather an important part of GIS. I’ve done the leg work for this to find out in the published studies I’ve gathered WHAT they’re doing with GIS, and using GIS&T BoK determined that the Geospatial Data Knowledge Area is the most relevant, so the choice of topic should come from there – Coordinate Systems, Map Projections, Data Quality, GPS, Field Data Collection, Metadata.
  • “… in interdisciplinary research?” = I’ve done the leg work to find out about challenges/suggested solutions in interdisciplinary research, so I know what I’m up against and I know what issues I need to be prepared for, to shut them down before they happen. Again, from the lit review and published studies work, I’ve identified that “Collaborating with Other Disciplines” is the biggest issue (e.g. the knowledge gap between the disciplines), and that “Build Relationships” and “Training” are often suggested as solutions. So, to put it all together, I propose to fill that gap between the disciplines with knowledge, created together, through collaborative learning, which helps build the relationship with your fellow researchers and teach you how to use a valuable research tool (in this instance GIS).

So I guess, with a small rejig, it’d be better to say “How does a non-formal learning approach compare to an informal one when adult learners learn to use GIS for Field Data Collection in interdisciplinary research?”

(Note: Further work is necessary to centre on Field Data Collection as THE topic; let’s just consider it a place-holder for now)

Teaching Through Research Workshop – Day 5

The thing about interdisciplinarity is that, for as much as we try to be interdisciplinary, we still end up going back to our own disciplines, by default. It’s comfortable, it’s what we know; going into something different can put us in a vulnerable position, as we don’t know about that other discipline. We don’t want to look stupid – we’re academics; looking stupid is like bleeding in shark infested waters.

I’m posting this post during the day, as opposed to at the end of it, because of this point on interdisciplinarity. Many of the attendees are from the disciplines of Biology, Chemistry and Physics; as the Geographic Information Scientist (the bastard child of Geography and Information Studies), I have a completely different knowledge sphere, with little overlap with the others. I could tell you about where to source materials, or analyse the spatial distribution of your market, but I have no idea how to “increase the enzymatic activity of cutinase in washing power”. First, I have a vague notion of an enzyme (haven’t done anything in Bio since 8th grade [when I was 13 years old]); secondly, “cutinase” has the same meaning as “fliminy-floo” to me. That said, though, I’m not going to, proverbially, bleed in the shark infested waters. The point was to think about how to design a curriculum to teach this thing, which the rest of the group seemed to understand.

For the greater good, I just quietly listened and tried to take away what I could, but I think the picture included with this post largely sums up my feelings. However, one of the other participants absolutely flattered me in saying that my work on challenges/suggested solutions in Interdisciplinary Research was something that we NEED to talk about, as she (and myself included) believed that the focus of the workshop was on establishing INTERDISCIPLINARY teaching methods. I guess the thing to take away from this is that we have to come away from what’s comfortable, and truly try to be more interdisciplinary; don’t assume the people that you’re working with have any understanding of your discipline, and then, if you can successfully teach them what they want to learn about your discipline (or what you think they need to know about it) and there is uptake, make note of what you did, because you’re doing something right.

Teaching Through Research Workshop – Day 4

One of the speakers from the day totally got my attention, as the discussion was on learning through gaming. She’s compiled a website called the Science Game Center, which lists science-oriented games that she thinks are interesting (check it out and look into a few, if you’re interested). We had a geeky gaming discussions afterwards, but what rang true in what she said was that you use games to teach little bits at a time, keep going, keep referring back to it, and then keep building on it. Like in the Legend of Zelda, you get the lantern to light up dark rooms to get through some dungeons and later you get the bow and arrows to beat Gohma; (spoiler alert) to beat Gannon and win the game, you have to light the room when the torches go out, and then, when Gannon is visible for a quick second, you have to shoot him with an arrow 3 times. This combines both components you learned earlier in the game; and years later, this is something I still remember (if only we could do that with Biology, etc.).

On a different note, going to workshops/conferences isn’t just about learning about the topics of the conference, but also to learn about the culture of the place you’re visiting and the people you meet – the food, the language, and the humour. One of the French conference participants shared with me the story of Serge the Llama –

For those who don’t speak French, basically some guys having a bit of drunken fun “borrowed” a llama from the Circus and took it for a ride on the trams in Bordeaux. The llama became an overnight sensation; you can read more about it in English in the article on The Guardian. Oddly, this story made me think about Citizen Science – it was a silly idea that makes many say “why?” but that day, those guys thought “why not?” I’m not advocating mass llama abductions, but why not think of absurd things and see where they lead? Let’s let Serge’s story and its silliness inspire us to be weird!

Teaching Through Research Workshop – Day 3

Today we heard from speakers covering familiar topics such as Citizen Science and Gamification; inside the ExCiteS Research Group we’re very familiar with these. Admittedly, though interesting, I used a bit of this time to pull together the work for the course I’m to develop, compiling instructional information on how to use ArcGIS.com to create a Story Map (which I will present for critique and further develop tomorrow).

My own concerns about Gamification are still out there, and largely unanswered. I’m a HUGE gamer, and though someone may make something with good aims, it doesn’t mean I’m actually going play it. The game needs to be fun, engaging, well designed; and many aspects of those are highly subjective. What’s the perfect formula? I don’t know, but a point one of the speakers touched on earlier is that we may be able to improve successful uptake if an existing technology (with an already established user community) is used.

At the end of the day, we were asked to think about how we may incorporate Citizen Science or Gamification into our activity that we’re designing, which admittedly made me make this face:

I may be able to include it as my way of assessing after the activity, to see if interdisciplinary thinking and uptake of GIS concepts were achieved, but that has yet to be determined. Just because I’m a gamer, doesn’t mean that the other academics I’ll be working with are…

Teaching Through Research Workshop – Day 2

The day started off with a talk about how to be better teachers, and keep our students engaged. I quite liked the quote by Henri Poincaré that was mentioned: “Science is built up of facts, as a house is with stones. But a collection of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones a house.” It really made me think about a number of the lectures I’ve been to, where someone just chucked info at me with no context and thought they were conveying their material, when in actuality they either conveyed confusion of boredom, as I had no idea what they were saying. Later we discussed the nuances between Research Led Learning and Research Based Learning, which had particular relevance to me, as UCL’s new provost is enacting this change University-wise, and I’ll be feeling the effects of this difference soon (as it’s rolled out to all the departments). The last speaker for the morning impressed upon the group the importance for standards and literacy (in a broader sense) to effectively engage students and showed examples of how this was implemented in her organisation.

The afternoon was quite interesting; we broke off into smaller groups, arranged today by topic (my group had a heavy interdisciplinary slant) to discuss the individual projects we were hoping to work on during the workshop. It seemed we were all initially hinting at problems associated with interdisciplinary programmes, so I presented my work on common challenges and suggested solutions in interdisciplinary research. The ideas seemed to be well received and address a number of issues the various group members faced, hopefully helping some of them better structure the activity they’re going to work on by taking into account the things they can do to handle problems before they happen. For my own project, I’m largely building off of what I’d already begun to structure earlier, but have some new ideas, as we’ve also been asked to think about how we can make this activity extensible and deployable in a wider context. If I can set up instructions on using arcgis.com, launching a Story Map, and how to gather/load data, then the tech for the activity is as good as done and I can begin thinking about context issues a bit more. To tie back to the quote by Poincaré, the tech for this solution could be considered the skeleton for the house and the context the rest of the construction materials; however, as of right now, they’re all in piles awaiting assembly.

Teaching Through Research Workshop – Day 1

The first day at the workshop was great; on a simple note, it was really nice walking from where I’m staying to where the workshop is being hosted. Though a 35 minute walk may seem like a hike to some, it’s great not having to cram on a crowded Tube train and getting to experience the sights and sounds of Paris: people getting coffee in the morning, picking up groceries for the day, or just simply taking their dog for a walk. Perhaps it’s the romantic notion of Paris (or a naive one), but it definitely seems a little slower/laid back than London.

Anyway, it was great meeting everyone at the workshop and seeing how international the crowd is. There also seemed to be a common theme in disciplines as many people were from biology, physics, and engineering. The speakers in the morning set the stage, inspiring us to push at the boundaries of knowledge and think innovatively, and in the afternoon, we had a chance to apply that in a group activity, where we designed our own Education System on our own planet, with whatever parameters we decided. The group I was in really gelled well, and I thought we came up with some great ideas, such as the following:

  • Open Access
  • Equal Opportunity
  • Project Based Learning
  • Peer-to-Peer, Mentorship, and Life Long Educational Practices
  • Personalised Education
  • Intertwined Community
  • Work/Life Balance
  • Spatial Layout
  • Environmental and Technological Sustainability
  • Inter/Intra-Planetary Expeditions

As those involved in the workshop are like-minded when it comes to the importance of education and interest in interdisciplinary research, it wasn’t surprising to see many of these mentioned by the other groups. Though we conceived these ideas when thinking about planets of our own design, free from the constraints many commonly feel, perhaps we can apply these “alien” concepts to the programmes we hope to develop in this workshop to enact some real change in the way we approach education in our own work. Two things I’ve taken away from today are the following:

1. Project Based Learning and Personalised Education seem to be concepts that interest many in the group, so my own work may be going in the right direction.

2. Though we all come from different backgrounds, we all seem to share an intellectual curiosity that motivates us and a genuine concern in making an impact through teaching.

Teaching Through Research Workshop – Preamble

My research group at UCL, Extreme Citizen Science, was kind enough to allow me to attend the Teaching Through Research workshop at The Centre for Research and Interdisciplinarity in Paris. When I received my acceptance letter to the workshop, I excited but nervous, in that most of the attendees seemed to be mid/late career academics, and I have yet to do my upgrade from MPhil to PhD candidate. Nevertheless, I saw this as a great opportunity to accelerate the progress of the experiments I’m planning as part of my work, with the help of some great interdisciplinary researchers from around the world, as the aim of this workshop is to help those attending to develop an interdisciplinary teaching/learning activity to launch within the next 24 months. Through my work, so far, I’ve identified challenges/suggested solutions to interdisciplinary research from my literature review, ones encountered in published interdisciplinary research projects that involve GIS (as well as relevant GIS concepts, based on the Geographic Information Science & Technology Body of Knowledge [GIS&T BoK]), and some practical work with a few interdisciplinary groups to find the following:

  • “Difficulty Collaborating with Other Disciplines” is cited as the most common challenge in interdisciplinary research in the literature review and has been verified through the published studies and practical work
  • Though “Provide Training on Technical and Supplemental Skills” was the most cited suggested solution in interdisciplinary research, published studies and practical work more often suggested “Building Relationships” as a solution
  • The most important GIS&T BoK Knowledge Area’s geospatial concepts appears to be “Geospatial Data”, thus signifying what matters to most when using GIS in interdisciplinary research

So, bearing these in mind, through my research, I suggest that we offer a training programme in “Geospatial Data” to help those from various disciplines involved in interdisciplinary research projects that use GIS to learn how to collaborate and build relationships (encompassing all the findings from literature, published studies and practical work). I’d like to do this in a Problem Based Learning approach to focus on real-world relevance with the various teams that I’ll be teaching, as part of the case studies for my work, and deliver the material online to some and face-to-face for others, to also measure which mode is more effective in facilitating interdisciplinary thinking, as set forth in “Teaching and Learning in Interdisciplinary Higher Education: A Systematic Review” (Spelt et al, 2009, p. 372), and uptake of relevant GIS concepts.

The first experiment will be with the Challenging RISK team; as I formally start on that project in May, I need to start designing the GIS teaching/learning activity ASAP, and I hope to lay down the structure for that, as well as carry it forward for the future ones, in this workshop.