Academia has a mixed reaction to collaborative work. On the one hand, it is a practice widely used by academics; on the other hand students are warned against the evils of plagiarism. This paper will look at these seemingly paradoxical attitudes and ask how, if at all, student learning can be both collaboratively generated yet individually original, and also how the products of a collaboratively generated student submission could be formally assessed. Im going to begin by briefly looking at two different views about the role of the scholar in HE and then considering two different ideas about originality. After that Im going to look at how collaboration works in the Sciences before highlighting some collaborative practices in the Humanities. Ill end by asking what type of learning design could support a collaborative approach to learning in the Arts and Humanities and suggesting a couple of promising ones.
- 1. Collaboration in the Arts and Humanities Sarah Honeychurch @NomadWarMachine http://about.me/sarahhoneychurch
2. The Paradox 3. The Paradox 4. The Paradox 31.1 The University's degrees and other academic awards are given in recognition of a student's personal achievement. All work submitted by students for assessment is accepted on the understanding that it is the student's own effort. http://tinyurl.com/p722jgh 5. The Paradox ... candidates for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by published work shall present for the approval of Senate published work, which shall be a record of original research undertaken by the candidate... 6. The Paradox Submission of an original manuscript to the journal will be taken to mean that it represents original work not previously published, that it is not being considered elsewhere for publication; that the author is willing to assign copyright to the journal as per a contract that will be sent to the author just prior to publication and, if accepted for publication, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in any language, without the consent of the editor. 7. Working thesis Theory of knowledge influences ones idea of: the role of the teacher: expert, curator, facilitator, The model of the scholar: The importance of originality/creativity: doing something new, doing it for yourself, Which pedagogical theory is appropriate: behaviourism, constructivism, Whether a scholar should be solitary/collaborative 8. The role of the Scholar 9. Freire: Banking theory of learning Narration (with the teacher as narrator) leads the students to memorize mechanically the narrated account. Worse yet, it turns them into "containers," into "receptacles" to be "filled" by the teachers. The more completely she fills the receptacles, the better a teachers she is. The more meekly the receptacles permit themselves to be filled, the better students they are. 10. Sfard: Acquisition There are many types of entities that may be acquired in the process of learning. One finds a great variety of relevant terms among the key words of the frameworks generated by the acquisition metaphor: knowledge, concept, conception, idea, notion, misconception, meaning, sense, schema, fact, representation, material, contents. There are as many terms that denote the action of making such entities one's own: reception, acquisition, construction, internalization, appropriation, transmission, attainment, development, accumulation, grasp. The teacher may help the student to attain his or her goal by delivering, conveying, facilitating, mediating, et cetera. Once acquired, the knowledge, like any other commodity, may now be applied, transferred (to a different context), and shared with others. (p5) 11. Freire: Problem-posing education In problem-posing education, people develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in process, in transformation. 12. Sfard: Participation The acquisition metaphor is so strongly entrenched in our minds that we would probably never become aware of its existence if another, alternative metaphor did not start to develop. When we search through recent publications, the emergence of a new metaphor becomes immediately apparent. A far-reaching change is signalled by the fact that although all of these titles and expressions refer to learning, none of them mentions either "concept" or "knowledge. (p6) 13. Experts transmit knowledge 14. Curator 15. Expert/Curator 16. Facilitator 17. Sfard: pluralism of metaphors The relative advantages of each of the two metaphors make it difficult to give up either of them: Each has something to offer that the other cannot provide. Moreover, relinquishing either the AM or the PM may have grave consequences, whereas metaphorical pluralism embraces a promise of a better research and a more satisfactory practice. The basic tension between seemingly conflicting metaphors is our protection against theoretical excesses, and is a source of power. (p10) 18. Model of the Scholar original thinkers when young are almost always very lonely creatures 19. Model of the scholar Go away! Itll take me two weeks to get back to the point where I was before you interrupted me 20. Originality 21. What is unique to Shakespeare is how he instantiates these insights Real 2012 22. How does it work in the Sciences? Asking a scientist to reflect on the nature of collaboration is much like asking a fish to reflect on the nature of water. Real 2012 23. How it works in the Sciences A single person may write the final brief, but it depends on many others. In the sciences we simply make visible the hidden contributions of all those assistants. Real 257 A students PhD thesis often consists of a collection of three or more separate publishable manuscripts where the student is the first author of a multi-authored work. (p252) 24. How it works in the Sciences the pattern of authorship reveals a nearly universal structure within the scientific community. The first author is the person most responsible for the execution of experiments, analysis of data, and the writing of the paper. The last author is usually the PI, recognized as the senior investigator in the group. The relative intellectual contributions to the particular paper march in from these bookends with the senior people advancing from the rear. Many scientific journals now include as a footnote a specific breakdown of the exact contributions of each author toward the publication of the paper. (Real p252) 25. Nobel prize for physics 2013 the Academy took what looks like the simplest course in picking Dr Higgs and Dr Englert. That is bound to rankle with the others. But no one ever said that life is fair. The Economist http://tinyurl.com/mjm5fkt 26. How it might work in the Humanities (1) A single person may write the final brief, but it depends on many others. In the sciences we simply make visible the hidden contributions of all those assistants. I believe that the hidden contributions that accompany humanities research especially as the humanities work toward a more evidentiary model will likewise gravitate to a more collaborative and revealing structure. (Real 257) 27. But this is not quite right, because its way too simplistic How far back to go? Who to attribute? Unintentional contributions? 28. A written text is a bit like a pueblo Bruffee 1999 29. How it might work in the Humanities take 2 Collaboration =/= co-authoring 30. How does it work in the Humanities? At a philosophy seminar, we expect to help the speaker more than we expect to learn from the paper. (Handfield) Philosophy is an inherently social activity that thrives on the collision of viewpoints and rarely emerges from unchallenged interior monologue. (Warburton) "We do collaborate all the time, of course; its just that most of our collaborators are dead." (Collini) 31. Curation again curation today has evolved to apply to what we are all doing online ... a pedagogical tool to embolden critical inquiry and engagement in a digital age Storytelling advances the core media literacy principles of analysis, evaluation and creation. (Mihailidis and Cohen) 32. Curation as storytelling Curation is an act of problem solving. Curating information to tell a story creates a sense of responsibility for the curator. Storytelling advances the core media literacy principles of analysis, evaluation and creation. By curating, students can compose a story using content acquired on their search with heightened awareness of purpose and audience (Hobbs 2010). (M&H p6) 33. Mihailidis and Cohen: Curation as a core media literacy competence for the digital generation 34. How do we assess this (which learning designs?) Group work, group product NO Individual work, individual product NO Group work, individual product (e.g. Jigsaw) YES Individual work, group feedback, individual product (e.g. Patchwork text) YES 35. Peer reviewing Online tools (Aropa, Workshop, wikis, forums) Seminars and tutorials Conferences and workshops 36. Body and Belief (Vickys course) 37. Body and Belief Course Main learning activities comprising the course design 1. A formative assessment in semester 1 which requires you to debate a set topic in class. Sept-Nov? 2. Essay. 1st Dec. 20% 3. Jointly prepared seminar paper: presentation and written. Jan-Feb. 10% 4. Individual project: presentation and written. March? 20% 5. Final exam. 50%. 3 1-hour essays. 38. Body and Belief Course Assessment Weightings The summative weightings are as follows: Essay 20% Jointly produced seminar paper 10% Project paper 20% Exam 50% Total 100% 39. Philosophy as Problem solving In problem-posing education, people develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in process, in transformation. Freire 40. Collaboration in the Arts and Humanities Sarah Honeychurch @NomadWarMachine http://about.me/sarahhoneychurch