Tag Archives: Engagement

The Power of the Architect – Part 1

Posted on by
Reply

Designing environments that work

Modern office building

The other Monday evening, I was flicking through the chanels of the hotel tiny TV looking for something easy and not too brain taxking to watch, when I landed on a programme all about the secret life of buildings and how they way they are designed can have a fundemental and often quite scary effect on our behaviour, health and wellbeing. I thought it would do until the second episode of Corrie came on (I told you I needed something inane and not too taxing to relax didn’t I?).

Here’s what the Chanel 4′s introduction for the programme says on its website ” Architecture critic Tom Dyckhoff explores the impact the design of buildings can have on us – on our identity and self-esteem, and on relationships, our chances at school, and even our weight and immune system”

Well, I was only watching a couple of minutes when I was hooked. This programme was fascinating. So much so I started writing notes (so much for relaxing then!). This was the second of three in the series. Unfortunately I’d missed the first one which was the designs of our homes. I’m going to catch that one on On-Demand.

This episode concentrated on how architecture can change the way we feel and behave. It looked at how it can even change our brains. Wow – really?

Tom Dyckhoff visited several different buildings throughout the programme. Some of these have achieved iconic status such as The Gerkin designed Norman Foster. The Gerkin, which got it’s name from the its shape which looked like a giant gerkin, is a magnificant building but when you entered inside it became bland, souless, unispiring. The only thing going for it was the view. This was very different to Foster’s other iconic building in Ipswich.

The Willis building was iconic back in 1975 because it was one of the first truely open plan office buildings in the UK. It was column-free with reflective surfaces to reflect light back into the office space and a large rooftop restaurant which catered for all staff bringing levels together. There was evern a swimming pool (later covered over to provide more offices). This structure was unique also in that it said there was more to people than work. It was very popular with the workforce.

Bored man at deskWe had a fascinating insight into how architecture can have a detrimental effect on us when Dyckhoff then took us to Deloitte’s offices in London. Apparently, when the staff moved into their current building, morale took a nose dive. Team work and productivity fell dramatically. Guy Battle, partner in Deloitte even said his “heart fell” when he walked into the building. From the organisation’s point of view, the space was very efficient but it just didn’t inspire people. It was, again, souless. When asked what she would have like to change, one member of staff said “additional facilitities for staff” and somewhere where all the other tenants could “congregate and mingle”.

It seems that because these structures were built to house many different tenants they needed to have a broader appeal and therefore a less interesting look and feel. Rab Bennett, architect of the Deloitte building acknowledged the direction office spaces need to go in should be better and “if architects were more like craftsmen again, making things properly with good responsible work” people would still buy that although still maintained that buildings would still have to have a broad appeal. Norman Foster also agreed that perhaps the internal space could be better and had even tried to influence his clients. “at some point” he said “you have to let go”.

So how did the programme prove that how our environments are designed can affect our brain development? Enter Fred Gage, Neuroscientist at San Diego’s Salk Institute. Gage had carried out experiments on mice (apparently mice have a similar brain structure to humans). It seems that, contrary to the belief that we are all born with all the brain cells we need, we can actually grow new brain cells. Our brains cells can grow and mature by as much as 15% in a month. It appears that external environments do have a significant influence on our brain development.

NeuronsAs long as we are continually developing and we are moving within different spaces especially when those spaces are of different qualities and stimulii, our brains will constantly change and shift. Gage stated that “architects are impacting the structure of our brains by the spaces they are making but they’re not taking into consideration how”. He advised that both neuroscientists and architects need to work together because “we shoudl be highly motivated to optimise our understanding so we can optimise our own performance and abilities”.

Remember at the beginning of this post I said I’d settled down to relax and watch some mind numming TV. This was so I could help my brain switch off. No such luck. With this fascinating programme, my brain kicked into to gear and revved right up. Now I think I may have mentioned in the past how I’m always switched on and see analogies in life with learning everywhere. Oh how I wish I could switch off sometimes. Well that’s all very interesting, you might say, but what has this got to do with learning, blended learning and e-learning? I say it has everything to do with it.

What I saw was all these wonderfully shiny new buildings, cleverly constructed and award winning in design. They were rich in texture, unusual in shape, flashy and looked very expensive. All the time and energy seemed to had been spent on how good they looked. How impressive they were on the outside. Applauded how clever and innovative the artist/designer/architect was who came up with these plans. They are, indeed, things of wonder and (not always) beauty. But the one big flaw is that they were built for efficiency. They weren’t built with the people in mind. There was little thought in how people behave. There was no thought in how people feel. We’re people, not machines. We need social interaction, we need stimulation, we need challenge, we need emotional connections, we need to feel comfortable not constrained.

Have we fallen into the same trap when designing our e-learning? Have we spent our energies on designing shiny new learning environments full of ‘bling’. On the outside they look like they will deliver. They look expensive. They look clever and flash. They mezmarise and astound us with programming panache. Do they tantalise and entice us with wonderous award winning exteriors yet lifeless and cold on the inside with unispiring information laden drudgery? Of course the look is important but once you’re through that fancy door, are they devoid of challenge, social interaction and emotional connection? Can you choose your own path or are you constrained and shackled at every step? Are they designed with people in mind? As architects for our learning environments, do we really consider our audience and their needs?

Do we really understand the serious impact we can have when we build learning environments? Fred Gage, the neuroscientist mentioned above, advised that architects and neuroscientists should work together. Very true. I say the architects of our learning environments should heed the same advice.

In my next post I’m going to explore a little more of this fascinating programme and how we can make parallels in our learning designs.

And for those of you who would like to see the programme here it is on YouTube or On-Demand on Channel 4

All the world’s a stage

Posted on by
Reply

And all the men and women merely players

Have you ever struggled with writing engaging elearning? All too often the detached self study tutorials are full of what Cathy Moore calls ‘corporate drone‘ and because we have become used to writing what we think the organisation wants, we can find it tricky to look beyond the business gobbledygook and write what our learners need to hear/read.

Now there are lots of things we can do to help our elearning become more engaging but the one important thing that’s often missing is the human touch. Somehow when writing for these self study tutorials we forget there is a human being on the other end of the computer. We write business-speak – formal. The last thing to help people feel at ease is formality.

When I was young and being taught English Grammar in school, all my essays had to be grammatically correct. I was taught never to shorten words. I was told always to write ‘it is’ not ‘it’s’ or ‘cannot’ not ‘can’t’. This may still be the case if you’re writing novels. It’s difficult to unlearn these things (and if my Father ever read what I write these days, he’d be appalled).

Here’s my advice…. “imagine you are sitting right next to the person. What would you actually say to them?”. Because the thing is, even though the tutorial may reach hundreds or thousands of people, there’s only one person sitting on the other end of that PC. It’s an intimate experience. You are talking only to them not the masses. You are connecting only with that one person. Allow them to feel you really exist as a human being not a corporate clone.

I like to think that writing for elearning tutorials is a little like writing a stage play script or a movie script. Write the conversations you will have with that individual. If creating scenarios, write the script for the scene and create realistic characters to ‘speak’ and ‘act’ out the conversations and emotions. Use natural language. Use visuals to depict emotion or thought bubbles to allow us to understand what the character might be thinking. Avoid all those lovely descriptive adjectives we would see in great novels we’re not writing novels, we’re writing scenes so learners can imagine themselves right there.

Make their online learning experience just that – an experience. And one to remember.

A Glee-ful approach to learning

Posted on by
2

My Sunday was a lazy one. I was vegging out on the sofa with my two dogs keeping me company while my other half was trudging up and down woodland shooting his bow and arrows. Bliss! I was flicking through the channels to find something of interest and came across Glee Club. I’ve never seen it before but heard a lot about it and thought it the perfect veg-out, feel-good way to spend an afternoon.

Well, I thought I was going to spend a lazy hour anyway not thinking about work – house-work or otherwise. But – no – not a chance. My little grey cells jumped into action during an interaction between Mr Will Schuester, the Glee Club teacher played by Matthew Morrison, and a substitute teacher, Holly Holiday played by Gwyneth Paltrow who was standing in from Will as he suffered from ‘monkey flu’ (well I need to put you in the picture). Holly, was a breath of fresh air to the students. She had an up-beat attitude and connected with them emotionally (and Gwyneth did an amazing rendition of Cee Lo Green’s ‘Forget You’ in the episode too).

What made my slumbering grey cells jump to life was the following conversation:

Will: “you’re a substitute – of course you can paint murals and let the kids sing whatever they want. You don’t have to deal with the hangover of all that fun”

Holly: “16% of all students dropped out last year. You can’t expect these kids to sit up and pay attention. These kids feel special. They have a voice and if we don’t listen to it they just tune out” (sound familiar?)

Will: “I give my kids a voice. I just don’t let it run free. It’s my job to know more than they do” (hmmmm – sound familiar?)

Holly: “Right – but you don’t know more about what they care about most – themselves. These kids get bored…. they change their Facebook status. They’re entitled to have all these emotions and not only that, they’re entitled for the world to care about them. That’s what this generation is all about.”

Will: “A great teacher is supposed to show them there are other points of view besides their own!”

Holly: “OK. What do you do when a kid does something really great in your class?”

Will: “I praise them!”

Holly: “I Tweet about it. Right there and then and then for 30 seconds I know that kid has a connection with me.”

Yeah! I know. Sad isn’t it. But it just shows we can learn from sometimes the most unexpected places and occurrences. Glee Club is an ‘all-come-good-in-the-end’ programme. I loved it (but then I loved Fame – the original Glee Club). So what connection did I make from this? Well, it’s set within a school so the teaching bit is obvious. But the message is clear:

We need to connect with our learners emotionally (it doesn’t matter how young or old they are).

We need to understand their point of view and give them a voice.

We need to encourage them to be more self-directed in their learning rather than be told what’s best for them.

They need to see the relevance to help them motivated to learn

We need to become familiar with the tools they use everyday and harness them

We need to step down off the soapbox and admit there is more for us to learn and they can teach us too

The first step is asking “what would YOU like?” “what would help YOU to learn?” “what would YOU like to see happen?”

We need to try and step into their world without it looking too much like ‘dad-dancing’ at a family wedding!

The new generation has already joined us in our organisations. They are the digital natives. They have already introduced some of us oldies to their world and welcomed us with open arms. We are the digital immigrants and are finding the ‘new world’ exciting, challenging and full of opportunities.

I’d like you to humour me a little more with my Glee themed post. Every feel-good story has a happy ending and this one is no different.

It culminated in my all time favourite musical number. A traditional classic – timeless. Singing in the Rain.

On Will’s return to the Glee Club, he wanted the group to perform it. Because it was timeless, a classic and his favourite too, he was convinced everyone else would be equally enthusiastic. Now the movie dates back to 1952 but the song ‘Singing in the Rain’ was actually written in 1929 for ‘Hollywood Review of 1929″. How could a younger generation relate to something so old. How could they connect emotionally with this ancient score?

Realising he needed help to connect with his students he sought the help of his nemesis, Holly, who worked with him to bring the classic up to date, keeping the magic of the traditional but adding a modern flavour to appeal to a newer audience. The result was a magical blend of old and new – tradition and modern. Here is the number the Glee Club performed.

Some classics are too good to be missed but to get the message across to a different audience, we need a different blend while still keeping the message fresh.

And for those hopeless romantics and lovers of the classic number, here is Gene Kelly. Enjoy!