The practice of conversation theory: Understanding and encouraging innovation∗

Comput. Educ. Vol. 8, No. Printed in Great Britain

0360-1315184 $3.00+ 0.00 Pergamon Press Ltd

4, pp. 371-376, 1984

THE PRACTICE OF CONVERSATION UNDERSTANDING AND ENCOURAGING

THEORY: INNOVATION*

HEATHER MACKENZIE LEE Centre for System Research and Applied Epistemology, Concordia University, Sir George William Campus, 1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3G lM8

This paper discusses the implementation of and theories supporting a computerized version of CASTE (Course Assembly System and Tutorial Environment). CASTE is a systems approach to course assembly and learning and is an embodiment of a theory of learning and innovation called Conversation Theory. Conversation Theory is in agreement with the most advanced scientific theories of physical reality and offers to education a holistic, systems approach to teaching, learning and encouraging innovation. THE

SYSTEMS

VIEW

The systems view looks at the world in terms of the interrelatedness of all phenomena. In this framework, an integrated whole whose properties cannot be reduced to those of its parts is called a system. Few would deny the legitimacy of the interdisciplinary, systems approach. As outlined by Von Bertalanffy [ 11,General Systems Theory has become a fulcrum in modern scientific thought. In practise, system is a key concept in, for example; “systems research”, “systems engineering” and “systems analysis”. Ackoff[2] sees the work being done under the banner of systems research (and its many synonyms) as what is probably the most comprehensive effort to attain a synthesis of scientific knowledge yet made. Detailed definitions and descriptions of systems and systems behaviour are provided by Ackoff. For the purposes of this paper, the more general characteristics of systems, linking systems thinking to teaching, learning and innovation will be discussed. In a system, each subsystem must have an integrative tendency to function as part of the whole and a self-assertive tendency to preserve its individual autonomy. These two tendencies are opposite but complimentary and, in a healthy system, there is a balance between integration and self-assertion. This balance is not static but consists of a dynamic interplay between the two complimentary tendencies and makes the whole system flexible and open to change. If these integrative and self-assertive tendencies are isolated from each other, an imbalance occurs in the system. Capra[3] draws a useful analogy between the complimentary aspects of systems and the two modes of consciousness that have been characteristic of the human mind throughout the ages. These modes are the rational, corresponding to the self-assertive tendencies of systems and the intuitive corresponding to the integrative tendencies of systems and are complimentary modes of functioning in the human mind. Rational thinking is linear, focused and analytic. It belongs to the realm of intellect whose function it is to discriminate, measure and categorize. Intuitive knowledge, on the other hand, is based on a direct non-intellectual experience of reality arising in an expanded state of awareness. It tends to be synthesizing, holistic and non-linear. In keeping with systems thinking, an imbalance occurs if these two modes of consciousness are isolated. Capra explains many of our present world dilemmas in the context of these systems concepts. He shows how the isolation of the rational and intuitive modes of consciousness have led to the present condition of, for example, our ecosystem. The profoundly anti ecological attitudes of today are, according to Capra, a result of an overemphasis on the scientific method and on rational, analytic thinking. As Capra points out, the understanding of ecosystems is hindered by the very

*The preparation of this paper and much of the ongoing research is supported by the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioural and Social Sciences. 371

HEATHERMACKENZIE LEE

372

nature of the rational mind. Rational thinking is linear whereas ecological awareness entails an intuition of non-linear systems. Ecological awareness will arise only when we combine our rational knowledge with an intuition of the non-linear nature of our environment. Our progress then has been largely a rational and intellectual affair and this one sided evolution has now reached a highly alarming stage. A situation so paradoxical that it borders insanity. We can control the soft landings of space craft on distant planets, but we are unable to control the polluting fumes emanating from our cars and factories. We propose Utopian communities in gigantic space colonies, but cannot manage our cities [3, p. 421. There is little doubt as to whether our educational system, like the ecosystem is also suffering from overemphasis of a rational consciousness. Doesn’t the self-assertiveness of our educational system discourage original ideas and the questioning of authority as it encourages submissive and uniform behaviour? A teacher in recent reference to one of her polite but nonconforming pupils explained to me that he had to be “nipped in the bud” and “stepped on” in order to learn. Intuitively, this just does not make sense. CONVERSATION

THEORY

AND

EDUCATIONAL

PRACTICE

I believe that the above comment illustrates the limitations that rational, linear thinking imposes on educational practice. While an outcome of this thinking on our ecology is an endangered ecosystem, an outcome in education is an endangered knowledge system. Our society has reached a point where we need to establish a balance between the integrative and the self-assertive, the rational and the intuitive, the parts and the whole. We are at a turning point and in need of a new course. This new course can be guided by a systems approach. Beer[4] explains the Western cultures’ view of human beings and the view that system theory takes of a human being. In the Western culture s/he is increasingly treated as a fixed closed and compartmentalized entity permitted a limited number of characteristics. But a person, from any standpoint is necessarily a system; one that maintains identity through a set of relationships between its internal elements and also has self-consciousness of that identity through the self reference of its internal activity. Moreover, this person-system interacts with others to form social units which are themselves systems. In their societary roles, people do not so much bounce off each other like billiard balls as interpenetrate systemically, sharing aspects of their personalities in less or greater richness. In educational practice, this view of human beings would prohibit “nipping in the bud” and the ensuing constraint of human potential in favour of learning to learn and the ensuing release of human potential. One theory of learning and innovation that is based upon a systems view of the learner and of knowledge is Conversation Theory (CT) developed by Gordon Pask and his associates[5,6]. At Concordia University and other locations research in and development of CT is aimed at understanding the nature of creativity and encouraging qualitative improvements in learning and learning to learn. According to CT creative thinking is not a linear knot-and-string procedure but entails concurrency of thinking based upon interrelationships amongst ideas or topics in a conversation. Knowledge is viewed as a dynamic, evolving system forming a complex web of interrelationships amongst subsystems. This knowledge would be exteriorized in a conversation as for example topics or concepts in a specific discipline. In keeping with system theory, topics in a knowledge system exhibit the complimentary modes of self-assertion (distinction in CT) and integration (coherence in CT). In his paper presented at this meeting, Dr Pask outlines the rules of CT based upon these coherence and distinction properties of knowledge systems. With this view of knowledge as a dynamic, evolving system, a topic in a knowledge structure cannot stand alone but instead must be produced and reproduced through its interrelationships with other topics (i.e. topics that are “stuck” to it). Thus, a topic is part of an integrated, irreducable whole and has meaning only in context with other topics. In CT, interrelationships amongst topics are represented by an entailment mesh (see Fig. 1 for an example). This mesh is

Fig. 1. An entailment

mesh for Conversation

Theory.

II/I /

/

374

HEATHER MACKENZIE LEE

Upon reaching the end of the above paragraph, how I regretted including the term innovation in the title of this paper. It seemed that the time had come for a discussion of how innovation fit and I was at a loss for words. I was about to go back and edit this bothersome term out when “systems view” and “knowledge”, two terms that I more or less understood somehow and suddenly combined in my muddled brain and produced “innovation”. This was a new and much needed understanding and it then made sense (at least for now) to go on with the following paragraph and especially the following sentence. Example

1. A coalescence

of topics

a static record or model of my (very dynamic) conversations about CT. The mesh is constructed in the circular, no beginning, no end (hermaneutic) manner shown because it is intended to represent a knowledge system and knowledge has no beginning and no end. It is this “systems view” of “knowledge” in CT that makes room for “innovation”. While linear, rational thinking can be involved, the combination of concepts or topics to produce a new concept or topic requires non-linear, intuitive thinking. Innovation in CT entails concurrent thinking where at least two topics are subsequently coalesced at the moment of innovation into one. Pask describes innovation as a process without commitment to its originality or creative value[5]. Although the topic “innovation” in Example 1 is not a previously unknown topic, the way in which it was produced from “systems view” and “knowledge” (and probably numerous other topics) was new to me. Sometimes, as evidenced in humankind’s great discoveries, the new topic is a previously unknown, or at least unproduced concept and its discovery is an invention. These complex cognitive operations involved in learning and innovation are described in for example Pask[S, 61 and more recently Pask[7]. CASTE

AND

ENCOURAGING

INNOVATION

This systems approach to understanding innovation is reflected in a practical embodiment of CT called CASTE (Course Assembly System and Tutorial Environment). At Concordia University, a computerized* version of CASTE helps instructors to assemble courses in keeping with a circular, hermaneutic approach to the structure of knowledge and then tutors by allowing the student to choose his or her own path through this course. The CASTE system also keeps a record of each student’s individual path and allows the student to “teach” (i.e. add) new topics as the course grows and evolves. In this way, the student is an active participant in a dynamic living system. He or she does not simply bounce off like a “billiard ball”, but “interpenetrates systematically”. Course assembly

system

The course assembly stage of CASTE entails the construction of the knowledge structure in the form of an entailment mesh. Figure 1 is an entailment mesh for one course presently tutored by CASTE at Concordia. Although it, necessarily, appears static, this mesh is by no means fixed as it represents a dynamic mental process (i.e. the conversations previously mentioned). The mesh contains 52 topics and 32 topic relations or interrelated clusters that are understood by the author amongst topics were in the sense of Example 1. The systemic “rules” of coherence and distinction adhered to so that any topic or cluster of topics can be produced or derived from all the other topics in the mesh. This flexible ability of an entailment mesh to “unfold” under different topics is explained in detail by Pask[7]. Tutorial

environment

Students begin the tutorial session by choosing a topic to learn from the respective entailment mesh which is provided. In the computerized version of CASTE at Concordia, each cluster of topics forms a file and all files are equally accessible by the student. Some topics are included in many *Runs on Apple II machine processor.

with CPM

operating

system,

128 K RAM

board

(for file management),

80 col. card.

2.80

The practice

of Conversation

375

Theory

APPlEl[+ COHPllTlBLECOMPUTERS

CASTE Fig. 2. CASTE,

an epistemological

laboratory.

(The author figure.)

is grateful

to Julian

Daniel for providing

this

clusters thus increasing the number of ways of looking at, or producing, these topics. For example, the topic learning in Fig. 1 would be included in eight different clusters. The student may then jump from topic to topic in a non-linear fashion or follow all clusters for each topic in a linear way or, even combine these two strategies. The individual student’s path is recorded by CASTE. These records of student learning strategies (holist, serialist or versatile) provide one source of valuable information for ongoing research into how people learn. Dr Pask’s work on styles and strategies of learning is further explained in, for example Lindstrom[8]. As can be seen in Fig. 2, CASTE’s tutorial environment employs more than one machine. This multi-machine environment also reflects the systems view of CT. These interfaced machines provide further context in the form of an interactive demonstration and an explanation for each of the 52 topics in the mesh. Further enrichments to this tutorial environment are provided by random access slide projections (see Fig. 2) depicting; the learner’s place on the mesh (i.e. where the topic is in the overall course) and a picture intended to provide a mnemonic visual of the meaning of each topic cluster. In addition to recording the student’s path through a CASTE tutorial, CASTE also records an evaluation of the student’s response to questions about each cluster. Although not claiming to measure high level innovative thinking, this evaluation procedure, coupled with learning strategy information provides, with our present technology, a glimpse of inward mental processes. As our technology expands with the evolution of human knowledge. CASTE and other “systems” oriented environments will nurture a balance between the rational and the intuitive and catalyze innovative “moments of excellence” in human thought.

REFERENCES Von Bertalanffy L., General systems theory-a critical review. In Systems Behavior (Edited by Beishon J. and Peters G.). Open University Press, London (1972). Ackoff R. L., Towards a system of systems concepts. In Systems Behavior (Edited by Beishon J. and Peters G.). Open University Press, London (1972). Capra F., The Turning Point: Science Society and the Rising Culture. Bantan, New York (1982). Beer 8, The Will of the People. Multimedia Publications, London (1982).

376 5. 6. 7. 8.

HEATHERMACKENZIELEE Pask G., Conversation, Cognition and Learning. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1975). Pask G. Conversation Theory: Applications in Education and Epistemology. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1976). Pask G., Review on Conversation Theory and a protologic Lp. ECT JI. In press. Lindstriim B., Learning Styles and Learning Strategies: 1. Conversation Theory-The Work of Gordon Pask. National Board of Education, Sweden (1983).