Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Oleg Liber's slides introducing educational cybernetics: variety in teaching and learning; the viable system model
Citation preview
An Introduction to Educational Cybernetics
Oleg LiberJune 2010
Cybernetics: a brief history
Control and communication in animal and machine– Wiener, N. (1965) “Cybernetics”, MIT Press
First order cybernetics:– Robotics (Walter)– Cellular automata (Von Neumann)– Homeostats and the Brain (Ashby)
Second order cybernetics– Anthropology/sociology (Bateson, Luhmann)– Psychology and learning (Pask, von Foerster, von Glasersfeld)– Organisations and management (Beer)
Educational Cybernetics
Conversation Theory: Gordon Pask– Pedagogy
Viable System Model: Stafford Beer– Organisation of Education
Educational Presuppositions 1
Constructivism– Knowledge is in the heads of people– Constructed on the basis of their (essentially
subjective) experience– The experience and interpretation of language
are no exceptionVon Glasersfeld(1995) Radical Constructivism. London, Falmer p 1
– (Academic) learning… is learning about descriptions of the world
Laurillard (1995) Rethinking University Teaching. London, Routledge p 22
Conversation theory
Background:– a cybernetic and dialectic framework that offers a
scientific theory to explain how interactions lead to "construction of knowledge", or, "knowing": wishing to preserve both the dynamic/kinetic quality, and the necessity for there to be a "knower".
– proposed by Gordon Pask in the 1970s.– Embodies many complex ideas– Fundamentally: Learning happens through
conversation, where meaning is agreed
A Conversational Framework
Teacher (describing)
Learner (describing)
Teacher (setting up microworld)
Learner (interacting
with microworld)
T (re)describes conception
L interacts with microworld to achieve task goal
Microworld gives feedback on action
L (re)describes conception
T adapts task goal in light of
L’s description
T reflects on action to modify
description
L adapts action in
light of T’s description
L reflects on
interaction to modify
description
A Conversational Framework
Teacher (describing)
Learner (describing)
Teacher (setting up microworld)
Learner (interacting
with microworld)
T (re)describes conception
L interacts with microworld to achieve task goal
Microworld gives feedback on action
L (re)describes conception
T adapts task goal in light of
L’s description
T reflects on action to modify
description
L adapts action in
light of T’s description
L reflects on
interaction to modify
description
Activity: applying the CF as a diagnostic/design tool
What scope does pedagogic design have for:– Teacher’s description
– Learner’s description
– Teacher’s re-description in light of learner’s conception or action
– Learner’s re-description in light of teacher’s re-description or
action
– Teacher’s activity design and task setting
– Learner’s activity engagement
– Teacher’s reflection on learner’s action
– Learner’s reflection on activity
Limitations of Conversational Framework
– Concerned with individual learner
– Originally conceived as a tool for design of
intelligent tutoring systems
– Assumes single learner with single tutor (or
tutoring system)
– Does not address group learning
Pedagogy as organisation
– Most learning contexts involve many learners with one teacher
– The challenge is to provided a variety of learning experiences within a mass education system
– This requires organisational AND pedagogic design
– The Viable System Model provides tools for organisational design
– Founded on Ashby’s Law of Requisite Variety
Variety
Definitions– The number of possible states of a system– The number of relevant (constrained) states of
a system– The number of observed or observable states
of a system
W. Ross Ashby, (1956) An Introduction to Cybernetics, Chapman & Hall, London. Internet (1999): http://pcp.vub.ac.be/books/IntroCyb.pdf
Example 1: traffic lights
= 8
= 4
Example 2: Chess
Number of legal positions ≈ 1043
Number of options available to a player is much less.
What does this imply?
Claude Shannon (1950) "Programming a Computer for Playing Chess", Phil. Mag. 41 256-275
Example 3: Football
Number of possible states of a team of 11 players= ?
Number of possible states of a great team of 11 players=?
Number of possible states of a team of 11 great players=?
Law of Requisite Variety
If a system is to be stable the number of states of its control mechanism must be greater than or equal to the number of states in the system being controlled
"only variety can destroy variety“
Ashby, W.R. 1956, Introduction to Cybernetics, Chapman & Hall
Traffic lights
Stop
Prepare to go
Go
Prepare to stop
Variety (Traffic light) = Variety (Driver)
Variety and Games
Competitive games are design to balance variety
Skill and tactics tip the balance
Balancing variety
– What if one football team has only 5 players, or is much better than the other?
– What if one tennis player is much better than the other?
– Amplifiers increase the variety of one side
– Attenuators limit the variety of one side
High variety
Low variety
amplifier
attenuator
transducer
channel
Each system constrains its own varietyMessages are transduced (made communicable)Channels have capacity (bandwidth) to transmit varietyAmplifiers increase varietyAttenuators reduce variety
Expert Novice
Expert simplifiesConverts to appropriate utterances for available channel(s)Communicates attenuated messageNovice interprets…
Rich domain model
Crude domain model
Ignorance is the lethal attenuator!
Pedagogy as variety management
Class Teacher
Explore how attenuation, amplification, and transduction take place within:1. Lecture based teaching2. Problem based learning (a problem is set with resources to help solution
discovery)3. Resource based learning (learning content is matched to the learner)4. Inquiry based learning (learners are supported in identifying own problem and
resources)5. Discovery learning (learners are put into designed environments to encourage
the “discovery” of ideas and principles)
More terminology
Homeostatic Loop
=
Elaborating the channels
Class Teacher
Communications involve:1. maintaining agreements on rules, responsibilities and resources2. managing the avoidance of conflict and achieving synergy3. monitoring the health of the system4. emergencies!
The COMMAND Channel: rules, responsibilities and resources
How are these typically implemented in different pedagogical scenarios?What is communicated?Are these amplifiers or attenuators?
Class Teacher
The COORDINATION (anti-oscillation) channel: managing the avoidance of conflict and achieving
synergy
How is this achieved in different pedagogic scenarios?What methods are there for stopping learners from competing unreasonably for resources?How do these affect their learning?
Class Teacher
The MONITORING Channel: checking the health of the system elements
What might learning “health” mean?How can teachers find out the current state of health?
Class Teacher
Elaborating the channels
Teacher
monitoring
Rules & resource negotiation
Learner self-organisation
adaptation
Environment
Environment
co-ordination
The department/institution
Other courses
University
Recursion
Viable Systems contain and are contained within other viable systems
Department
Course
Learner
Education system
Recursion: Department
Department management
monitoring
Rules & resource negotiation
Informal course collaboration
adaptation
Environment
Environment
co-ordination
The University
Courses in other
departments
Recursion: University
University management
monitoring
Rules & resource negotiation
Informal dept collaboration
adaptation
Environment
Environment
co-ordination
The institution
Depts in other universities
Recursion: Higher Education Sector
HE Sector management
monitoring
Rules & resource negotiation
Informal university collaboration
adaptation
Environment
Environment
co-ordination
Government
International universities
Applying the VSM as a course design/diagnostic tool
1. How are rules and resources negotiated (content and process)?
2. What framework will be used to cordinate the cohort? (i.e. pedagogical method!)
3. How can individual monitoring happen to permit intervention if needed?
4. What facilities are provided to allow learners to support each other?
5. How can the teacher adapt the course in light of ongoing experience?
6. Are there facilities for students to find resources outside of the course?
7. Are student supported in making sense of this course in their wider learning?
