Tag Archives: development

The circuitry of my head

8 Replies

UnknownSo as part of the ongoing exploration of online learning or MOOCing around as i’m fondly calling it, I enrolled in a second MOOC. This MOOC is nothing to do with anything I really need to know. I am doing it for the love of learning. Suitably it is the Learning Creative Learning MOOC.

I might step back a bit here. Just a little though.

Just over a blog posting ago…

Before I found a tweet about OpenBadges and before that led me to MOOCs and the joining of, I took a small test on a whim. The test highlighted that I am motivated by learning. This is not the learning which results in a piece of paper that motivates me. This motivation is through the solid act of learning in itself. I liken this to experiencing a puzzle box.

“Before you lies a simple box unknown, locked with a mechanism that can be discovered through tactile exploration. Unlock this mystery box and whether you find it is empty or full, the satisfaction is not in the contents, but in the opening.”

The discovery of being motivated by learning resonated with me on some level. I had been feeling a little unmotivated recently and this suggested a way forward. Looking through mental lists of options I would cycle through over and over again finding not a single one that appealed. In part this is laziness: I am easily dissuaded from difficult things. In part it is tiredness: I have a lot on! In part though: it is because I lacked a motivation. So I am on a quest to find one.

A modern take on the puzzle box

A modern take on the puzzle box

Let’s step back into creative learning again.

Learning about learning…

Each week of the MOOC reading is assigned and tasks are suggested. Task 1 is around doing the reading and reflecting on it.The reading this week was around connected learning (video) as an approach which differs from traditional education by leveraging the interest of an individual and allowing that interest to develop in a way that improves their academic, civic or employment prospects. The connected element means that new media helps develop this innate passion or talent. E.g., in the plainest of terms, the writer is allowed to write for the passion of it, they post their work online and receive feedback from peers on their interest. They learn from this and eventually become an author 1.

I haven’t reflected much but isn’t there something to that (especially for those learning-motivated) which makes good sense? I don’t think it’s a new idea – there seems to be a trend recently for the internet to find a new way of doing something and for people to think that nothing like it ever happened before. I’m confident that there was connected learning before connected computers which is why I like the phrase from one of the readings: “New media amplifies opportunities for connected learning.” The internet is a massive great big amplifier of things, including learning, then. Now that I like the idea of!

The second task is much more intriguing: read Seymour Papert’s essay on the “Gears of My Childhood” and write about an object from your childhood that interested and influenced you.

Much more up my street in my current exploration of the world. Perhaps a little bit ego-orientated but internal focus helps introverts like me make sense of the world. Hopefully we then find a way to apply that externally.

So let’s jump back again. Way back this time. I called this post the circuitry of my head because it resonated with an object pertinent in my childhood. The computer. I’m adding in a second object though: DNA.

The computer and DNA

My earliest memory of a computer was in school. I’m not sure what it was. It had a game involving a train and traffic signals. It had a painting app. It was all I can remember about the machine. I played with it twice, once in Year 1 and once in Year 2. Nobody really knew how to use it beyond those two apps i’m sure. I’m fairly confident it was an IBM PC AT given what I remember about it.

My second earliest memory was when my mum and I lived with my Nan. An uncle at the time had a BBC Micro. I’m also convinced that he never really knew how to use it. One day when he was out I sneaked in and retyped in a command i’d seen him type. It was probably a load command of some kind. A while later something happened.

Here’s the thing. After those early experiences I didn’t have a computer until I was older. It was a Commodore 64. My family never had the money for computers those early years so I spent many of them still wondering about those cream white boxes with the green text or the poor colour range and what made them work. What was inside them that brought them to life.

Commodore Datassette tape drive

Commodore Datassette tape drive – by Toni Saarikko

Those same years I was learning that I was broken. That what was bringing me to life was also, slowly, destroying me. At age 8 I did not have the real comprehension of that 2. At age 8 I believe two objects in my universe collided quietly and even I didn’t notice for a while.

I found that Commodore, and the Amiga that followed and the 486 after that and the Pentium and the AMDs and the Core 2′s and ultimately the i7 i have today were all there at the moments I needed them.

I learned about computers at a time people really started to use them personally (80s). I learned about the internet arguably when it started to enter the mainstream (90s). I studied the science of computing just before it has become essential in information societies (00s) and now I am productive on a daily basis using them despite their still being an element of seperation (10s).

DNAs influence has followed a similiar trajectory. I lost any potential in physical pursuits early on (80s). I went to secondary school at a time when it became an option for those with disabilities to study in the mainstream (90s). I went to university at a time when funding existed to make it feasible for me to leave home (00s) and finally if computers didn’t exist as they do today my access to the world would be severely limited and my job would be difficult 3. Books for a start are impractical. But research doesn’t need books anymore.

So in true double-helix fashion two strands have been joined, two objects have provided a structure for my path through the world, a sequence to progress by. The DNA was an object influencing me behind the scenes, subtly limiting certain choices and promoting others. The computer was acting as a magnet pulling me toward it, clearly highlighting an interesting path forward. It’s probably also the reason my dissertation was in genetic algorithms. I still have a mild fascination with evolution today.

I think it wasn’t the only path open to me. I might have taken another path. I might have written or reported. I might have travelled or read. I might have managed or sketched. All but for one thing: I need to understand the puzzles in the boxes. It’s the circuitry of my head.

Digital DNA - [attribution unkown :(]

Digital DNA – [attribution unkown :( ]

Notes:

  1. This really oversimplifies process, but it is the core of it. ↩
  2. At age 30, i’m still not sure I have it ↩
  3. Independently that is ↩

Packtypes: Just another dog in the pack?

2 Replies

So as part of ongoing change in the Policy and Transformation team that I work in, 1 the old team Tinker 2 has arrived and rolled up with a ‘let’s build a new team, let’s transform the way we work, let’s get to know our colleagues‘ cart. I actually always welcome tinkering with an open mind as it usually presents an opportunity to move in a potentially new, innovative direction 3 and to contribute thoughts usually held at the back of my head!

Packtypes Logo

Packtypes logo

One of the opportunities we’ve identified for developing the teamwork side of things is to consider how well we know each other, what our personalities are like and how we might communicate with each other better. It’s the typical Myers-Briggs ‘understand yourself, understand your colleagues‘ type scenario.

We’ve chosen to use ‘Packtypes‘ for our team which is an approach to personality assessment / emotional intelligence that promises a lot 4 and delivers it all through a tiny deck of cards.

Essentially instead of going through a detailed psychometric questionnaire, the cards themselves are used to determine the type of person you are, expressed via the dazzling metaphor of some rather haggered looking dogs. I think it’s based on Jungian psychology (though the book never really explains the science – therefore failing to reach at least one of the ‘packtypes’ it promotes).

Step out of the curtain for second

I should probably say here that I don’t have any clue about copyright here 5 so I may be stepping on the wrong strand of the web by discussing it but hey, I only plan to discuss the process and my own results and I certainly don’t plan to completely criticise (or praise) the approach so i’m hoping they might let me off a little! 6. I also won’t go beyond the surface detail of the profile just in case.

Back to Packypes.

The deck of cards contains 64 positive words describing a personality trait like ‘enthusiastic’ or ‘challenging’. Each word is associated with an image of a specific breed of dog, printed on the reverse of the card. Each breed or ‘packtype 7‘ is associated with specific personality traits. The deck comes with a book on how to make sense of it all.

One type of Packtypes pack

One type of Packtypes pack

With that in mind, the process of determining the ‘type’ of person you are works like this:

  1. Take the pack of cards with the words facing towards you.
  2. Select 12 words that best describe you in your chosen role (e.g. the ‘work’ you, the ‘home’ you, the ‘blogger’ you.)
  3. Turn the cards over to find the 12 pictures of packtypes with their corresponding breed.
  4. Sum the packtypes by breed (e.g. 4 hounds 8, 4 retrievers, 4 mongrels 9)
  5. Interpret your horoscope reading using one 10 of the helpful books.

I jest with that last point. I found that the process really is quite interesting to do, and unlike a horoscope it was uncannily accurate. I’m sceptical by nature, so I became a little suspicious that the pack was designed in a way so that every reading will result in that uncannilly accurate feeling. However, it turns out you can also ‘packtype’ other people 11 so we tried this in one of the team meetings.

I packtyped my colleague and somewhat surprisingly, despite choosing a completely different set of words, the profile turned out very similiar. He did the same to me and again, a broadly similiar result to my own self assessment. Perhaps not so easily dismissed then.

I know you are, you said you are, so what am I?

So i’m sure your now itching to know 12: what type of person was I? That, my friend is a story for another day though…

Ar, ok go on then. Having followed the process I came out with the following 12 words: analytical, imaginative, enthusiastic, resourceful, caring, considered, original, rational, principled, genuine, understanding, trusting. I turned the cards over 13, and was quite surprised with the initial results. The book says that numbers are important, so in order of size I came out with 3 Coachdogs, 2 Retrievers, 2 Pointers, 2 Hounds, 1 Mastiff, 1 Terrier, 1 Sheepdog. A very varied mix!

But what does it mean?

A good question! The book suggests you ignore the 1′s (At least to begin with). So in order of relevance:

  • Coachdog (my dominant influence): Relationships, empowerment, consensus
  • Pointer (lesser influence): Analysis, facts, working out the right answer
  • Hound (lesser influence): Creativity, ideas and unearthing new opportunities.
  • Retriver (lesser influence): Process, Principles, Trust and continuous improvement

The book also comes with a neat diagram reflecting where these breeds lie on an axis of facts and certainty through to new ideas and risk taking, or people and emotion through to results and action. You can use it to map where your personality supposedly sits as each dog lies in a given position. I sketched mine on my phone.

Packtypes Me

That blob is the me inside of me

Surprising to me, I spanned a wide range on the diagram. It suggests that the people element is really important to me, that I ground myself in facts and certainty but that I am still open to new ideas and risk taking. If you want to communicate with me you should go with the benefits to people first, though it helps to be a new idea, and be grounded in robust research.

The risk taking / new ideas side is relatively new to me. I will secretly admit to having done packtypes before and previously I very much fell in the bottom left corner. So it has changed since that time. I wonder how much the new aspects have come from my recent attempts to grow?

 

This is the great thing that I like in packtypes. You are free to redo it, to learn new things, to change yourself and redo it. Want to be more results/action? Feel free to make your way there. So long as ultimately you remain honest to yourself when picking the cards it should be reflective.

Overall this time I do think it’s feasibly accurate assessment of my broad personality. I look forward to doing it again at some stage.

A few extra thoughts

In discussions with my colleague we agreed that there was a lot of subjectivity in choosing the words. I interpreted ‘challenging’ in an entirely different way for example. There are also complexities around priming (what happened before you packtyped?), avoidance (would you really call yourself ‘inspirational’?), and team pressures (do you want to pick words in front of your colleagues?).

So that is packtypes in a very brief nutshell

I’ve purposely avoided getting into the depth of it in this post. I think that its only fair that packtypes get to keep their hard earned copyright. At £40 a pack on their public facing store though, it’s there to try and it sort of fits to me in the very nice – ‘cheap enough not to dissapoint if it’s a gimmick, but if it does deliver then it will pay itself back the world over‘ area. Do you really need a pack of cards to transform your relationships? Probably not. Is it fun and interesting to try? Yes, it is! Will it help me in my work? Most definitely. I’ve already got my manager begging for his dinner 14.

Notes:

  1. Soon to be Corporate Development & Engagement Team though that’s unconfirmed and may change (I actually like it more I think) ↩
  2. “A tinker’s debt is always paid: Once for any simple trade. Twice for freely-given aid. Thrice for any insult made.” – Patrick Rothfuss ↩
  3. innovation doesn’t happen without space ↩
  4. actually it promises an awful lot – like transforming your entire existence from it’s clearly boring one to your potentially awesome, better, one ↩
  5. any weekly blog clubbers want to take up a challenge to lay out the rules? ↩
  6. Seriously – if you are a copyright terrier you are welcome to contact me if discussing this is not allowed. I will amend, obfuscate, remove or otherwise! ↩
  7. it is just a metaphor so associations with real dogs should really be avoided ↩
  8. If you get 12 hounds, Elvis appears to sing a classic ↩
  9. Not really a packtype ↩
  10. yes, there’s more than one! You can get books specifically for parenting, teaching too ↩
  11. You can packtype anything apparently. Like a block of tasty cheese ↩
  12. either that or fleas ↩
  13. a little apprehensively to be honest, there’s always the worry that your results might disturb you I think. ↩
  14. come on! it had to end with a bad dog joke! ↩