The issue of play in HE LEGO in HE event, London 21 July 2015

Dr Alison James Associate Dean Teaching and Learning London College of Fashion @alisonrjames

Chrissi Nerantzi

Principal Lecturer Academic CDP Centre for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

@chrissinerantzi

Play in work, play in learning photograph David Stephenson www.cockermouth.org.uk

Thoughts and theories about play

Stuart Brown – play

needing purpose

Brian Sutton-Smith

The opposite of play is

depression

What kinds of play? Free, open

without agenda

Fantasy, emulation

collaborative competitive

Rule-bound Rule-

breaking

solitary gamified

http://kuwaitiful.com/youtube/cat-playing-piano-in-orchestra/

Playing and being playful…

• Is exploratory • Galvanizes imagination • Frees thinking of constraint • Reduces inhibitions • Bonds people • Creates alternatives • Simulates reality safely • Carves out fresh pathways • Enters the unknown • Throws everything into question

http://www.mnkstudio.com/blog/freedom/

Lego Serious Play • …is a systematic set of techniques and applications which allow

participants to explore complex issues or topics with no immediate obvious answer.

• …uses metaphor, symbolism and association…

• Each activity involves a four part process of posing a question, building, sharing and reflecting

• Builders own the meaning in their model

• Models can be individual and joint, small and large: whole landscapes of situations can be created, ‘what ifs’ can be safely explored

• Sessions last from between two hours to one day (shorter activities also possible)

Spider

Hand

Mobile phone cradle

Hairdryer

Tiddly-wink game

Dennis the Menace

Lego holders

Upside down saucer

A piece of jewellery

Weird crab

Ink blot

Blob

Hair clip Melted frisbee

Plant stand

Octopus Base to launch a rocket

A garment worn by Janet Jackson

Where has LSP been used at LCF/UAL?

• For student PPD • To think about student

engagement • To reflect on roles • To think about progress and

planning • In industry collaborations • To understand topics better • For academic support • To understand threshold

concepts • For evaluation & course

monitoring • to explore team identity

• To develop consensus and share ideas

• To build connections between people

• To explore sustainability • To share conceptions of how

we motivate learning • In doctoral study • For professional development

outside the university/abroad • In a Community of Practice • For strategy planning • To facilitate major change • For writing books

Alison’s Lego PPD Workshop

• Entirely international

• L4 course, 1 year

• C1000 students to date

• Trained 7 tutors to co-deliver LSP session

• Lego workshop, ‘Pod’ video diary using Brookfield’s CIQ, written self-analysis

• Warm up skills and use of metaphor

• Build models of their learning journeys – skills , attributes, feelings, experiences, changes etc

• Share, discuss, review

• Develop (‘double click’)

• ‘Gifting’ for each other

Team identity

Doctoral induction with LEGO

How do you feel about

being here?

What do you want your

research to be/look like?

What do you want most to achieve with

your research?

How did you get here?

What is most important to

you in embarking on

your PhD?

What most worries/excites

you about where you are right

now?

Writing books with LSP models

“Building the intangible into physical models, and articulating and visualising data can help us see what we may otherwise be missing, and find the surprising patterns.” (Kristiansen & Rasmussen, 2014, 215)

from empirical LEGO® use

to an evidence-based LEGO® approach

to LEGO® Serious Play®

to further experimentation with LEGO® & other materials

activity > workshop > course > interwoven into module > research

my explorative journey driven by curiosity

Academic development • PGCAP core module professional discussion

• PgCert core modules (identity)

• PgCert/MA (Creativity optional module)

Learning through making, identity, community

• LEGO in HE workshop series part 1 and 2

Learning and teaching • Undergraduate provision (opening up and

community building)

Evaluation • Undergraduate provision (evaluating

module) using an appreciative enquiry-based approach

Research • Focus group (Athena Swan Award) Science

and Engineering Faculty, gain insights into the staff experience and potential challenges, ideas generation

before

• guidelines shared

• LEGO models (30 mins)

during (30 mins)

• share learning journey using the LEGO model

• engage in a conversation

• reflection

• assessment

after

• feedback provided in minutes

• further reflection through social media

• sharing

Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice (@PGCAP)

2010-2013 (University of Salford)

“This model shows my movement from black and white, linear teaching towards a broader understanding of good teaching and a greater sense of adventure and experimentation in my own practice- moving into colour !!” Dr Sian Etherington http://pgcapsianetherington.wordpress.com/professional-discussion/

Results

relaxed more reflective

articulate with more ease metaphors richness of learning and impact of

module on practice deeper conversations unconscious learning

assessment: “informal” discussion with peers

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7007/13463088623_2bfb319f8d_z.jpg

“LEGO therapy! Would also be useful to do at the beginning of a new

unit!” student

“The familiar, playful and simplistic form of Lego was why many of the group (who did not identify as being creative or confident) felt so comfortable with using it as a prop to express their thoughts and feelings. The group focused more on the feedback as a whole reflective process, rather than being distracted by answering set questions.” student

Using LSP to evaluate an undergraduate module at MMU

“Reflecting on using LSP to evaluate the unit, I have to say that it was a refreshing process. It somehow made me, the lecturer, invisible and enabled me to observe my own students and actively listen to their experiences and stories. I think, using LSP to evaluate a unit, made the students understand better the role they play in their own learning. Through their stories they revealed that they now have realised that learning is not a one-way street of receiving information from the lecturer but that they play an essential role in their own way of learning and appreciate each other’s uniqueness that does enrich their own learning experience individually and collectively. “ Lecturer

Hollings Faculty, MMU

• Nutrition 21 Level 4 Unit • Used LEGO after induction

during first session to get to know each other and share expectations

• 50% facilitated by external to the unit colleague and with lecturer participation

• 50% facilitated by lecturer Students: opened-up, to work in groups AND on own, want variety, to be connected with peers outside the classroom

Using LSP for community building within an undergraduate module at MMU

• Spreading the bug • Idea for Creativity for

learning module was born

• LEGO in HE workshop series (see below)

LEGO in HE part 1 LEGO in HE part 2

Workshop 1 Introduction to LEGO(R) Serious Play(R), the method and applications: identity and community building workshop 2 Developing reflection using LSP workshop Ideas generation using LSP

workshop 1 Scoping the design/review of a unit/course using LSP workshop 2 Appreciative evaluation using LSP workshop 3 Experimenting beyond LSP and LEGO

https://youtu.be/NoWwdidOiSY

Academic development linked to LEGO for learning and teaching at MMU

These workshops are linked to FLEX MA level modules (15 and 30 credits) and colleagues can work towards FLEX [LEGO in HE]

Pedagogical Playground model

(Nerantzi, 2015)

Three main theories of teaching

(Ramsden, 2008)

Playground 1.0 supervised > feeling safe,

developing trust

Theory 1: Teaching as telling, transmission

or delivery - PASSIVE

Playground 2.0 participatory > gaining

playful confidence through guided

playful learning

Theory 2: Teaching as organising or

facilitating student activity - ACTIVE

Playground 3.0 self-determined >

autonomy, developing and sustaining

play-active practice

Theory 3: Teaching as making learning

possible – SELF-DIRECTED

Nerantzi, C. (2015) The Playground Model for Creative Professional Development, In: Nerantzi, C. & James, A. (eds.) (2015) Exploring Play in Higher Education, Creative Academic Magazine, Issue 2A, June 2015, pp. 40-50, available at http://www.creativeacademic.uk/

Creativity for learning module: Learning through making using LSP at MMU

Community Spaces – Connecting people

Open Spaces - Expansive minds

Story Spaces - Connecting hearts

Making Spaces – Connecting hands

Thinking Spaces – Connecting minds

Unit Learning Outcomes On successful completion of this unit, participants will be able to: • Critically discuss creative teaching as a driver for student engagement

and learning in their own professional context. • Develop and implement an innovation in their own practice. • Critically evaluate their innovation. 2 terms practice-based assessment – implement and evaluate an innovation Digital portfolios owned by students

• Innovative projects • Greenhouse contributions • Academic posters • Conference workshops • Published articles

Nerantzi, C. & James, A. (eds.) (2015) Exploring Play in Higher Education, Creative Academic Magazine, Issue 2a, Issue 2b, June 2015, available at http://www.creativeacademic.uk/magazine.html

Summer Conference, 15 July 2015

Creative and playful conference contributions by colleagues on the Creativity module

References Brown, S. (2010) Play. How it shapes the brain, opens the imagination, and invigorates the soul, London: Avery, Penguin.

Gauntlett, D. (2011) Making is connecting. The social meaning of creativity, from DIY and knitting to YouTube and Web2.0, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Geary, J. (2012) I is an other, The secret life of metaphor and how it shapes the way we see the world, New York: Harper Perennial.

Hallgrimsson, B. (2012) Prototyping and Modelmaking for Product Design, London: Laurence King Publishing.

Marton, F. (1994) Phenomenography as a Research Approach, in: Husen, T. And Postlethwaite, N, (2nd ed) The International Encyclopedia of Education, Vol. 8, Pergamon, pp. 4424-4429, available athttp://www.ped.gu.se/biorn/phgraph/civil/main/1res.appr.html [accessed 72 December 2012].

Moon, J. (2010) Using Story In Higher Education and Professional Development, Oxon: Routledge.

Nerantzi, C. and Despard, C. (submitted) Lego models to aid reflection. Enhancing the summative assessment experience in the context of Professional Discussions within accredited Academic Development provision, Innovations in Education and Teaching International.

Owens, T. (2012) Hitting the nail on the head: the importance of specific staff development for effective blended learning, in: Innovations in Education and Teaching International, Vol. 49, No. 4, November 2012, 389-400.

Palmer, P. J. (2007) The Courage to teach. Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Papert, S. and Harel, I. (1991) Situating Constructionism, in: Constructionism, Norwood: Ablex Publishing, Available from: http://www.papert.org/articles/SituatingConstructionism.html [accessed 1 January 2013]

Schön, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.