I coached my high school's
science team at The Milwaukee School of Engineering's annual High School
Invitational Science Competition. It included individual multiple choice tests
in physics, chemistry, biology, and general science. It also had a team test where
each school had its six members gather in separate rooms to solve problems over
a range of topics. I opted to be a runner and took materials to the various
classrooms in the college. I noticed as I whisked past the rooms the engagement
level as everyone was working intently to answer the challenging questions.
They were huddled together and it seemed that everyone was contributing. They
were working like a team. Their heads were in close proximity and their body language suggested a unique camaraderie that I rarely observed in my school.
It mirrored what Csikszentmihaly
and Hunter stated in their research report after surveying eight hundred
students during the course of a week for happiness that: "Teenagers
ascribe happiness to their moods when they are in situations of relative
freedom, in the company of age-mates, able to engage in flow activities that
stretch their skills and makes them feel alive and proud." [1]
Apparently that sense of
happiness arises when the children are with friends participating in activities
that stimulate their minds. The happiness could also mean productivity since
the authors maintain that they are stretching their skills. Can that
productivity/happiness be carried over to the classroom?
 |
| philmckinney |
Interestingly Dr. Alex Pentland, computer science professor at The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has investigated group dynamics in a very objective way. His team does not simply visit business settings and take notes while eyeballing employees carry out tasks, but rather accumulates digital data from a machine. [2]
That is, a small device about
the size of a cell phone called a sociometer, is placed under clothes, and an
assortment of data for infrared, sound, and movement detectors monitor
individuals as they interact. The interactions do not record words (like a tape
recorder) but rather use a complement of instruments:
a) Infrared detector: determined
face-to-face interactions to determine how much time sociometer users were
talking and their relative position to others in a room;
b) Microphone: how much
talking per person, interruptions, listening, and prosody – patterns of stress
and voice intonation to derive nonlinguistic social signals;
c) Accelerometer: recognize common daily human movements and
gestures (turning, sitting, stand up, displacement).
In his latest book Social Physics: How Good Ideas Spread-The
Lessons from a New Science Pentland discusses the results of large scale
studies using the sociometer, and then gives definitive steps to show how teams
can function with maximum productivity.
This peculiar combination of signals
from the sociometer are received by a computer and quantified to derive what
Pentland and his team called honest
social signaling. From a compilation of a group's workday data using
mathematical algorithms, an assessment of the company's network intelligence is compiled.
It is not an evaluation of
words but instead, as Pentland refers, an unconscious channel of communication,
because gesturing is universal for mammals, particularly humans when
complemented with talking. They have amassed data from hundreds of participants
from many venues for as long as a year. The sociometer experiments were able to
predict outcomes of dating situations, job interviews, and salary negotiations.
Successful collaborative situations
From hundreds of thousands of
hours of data collection from many different work and social settings, the MIT
group has found that the most successful collaborative situations included:
1. Large number of ideas: many short contributions
rather than a few long ones;
2. Dense interactions: a continuous, overlapping
cycling between making contributions and very short (less than one second)
responsive comments (such as "good," "that's right," "what?"
etc.) that serve to validate or invalidate the ideas and build consensus; and
3. Diversity of ideas: everyone within a group
contributing ideas and reactions, with similar levels of turn taking among the
participants. [2]
Social physics and what I acknowledge as a teacher
Even with the best practices
in my career as a science instructor that included pedagogy such as leading
discussions in a quick pace all-inclusive manner, or having students do
problems at the board, or presenting well-illustrated PowerPoints, the most
effective method, however, was collaborative exercises where the students
approximated the three Pentland items above. In those group scenarios the
students used well-crafted sheets and laboratory exercises which permitted a
free flow of exchanges between parties. What is so important here is that they
used social dynamics to maximize engagement and thus completed tasks
successfully.
In his research Pentland saw
that the power of engagement nurtured "direct, strong, positive
interactions between people." I found this to be true in my teaching career
because it promoted trust as members admonished each other in order to carry
out tasks successfully. Moreover, I witnessed peer social pressure to cooperate,
and saw the impact it had on successfully completing tasks. The students valued
their teammates for their talents and contributions, too, as a result of the cooperative
banter.
I think it is important to add that Pentland found that
sessions with groups that had one or two dominating talkers were not as
productive as those with equality of conversational turn-taking – where collective intelligence was highest.
Furthermore, level of engagement, "the extent to which everyone is in the
loop", was the most central predictor of productivity.
Group dynamics and the brain
The effectiveness of the
teamwork Pentland is describing is a function of the motivational centers in the
brain. Humans are a pleasure-driven species and in addition to sex and eating,
people derive pleasure from social encounters. We learn from each other and are
ego-stroked from kind words and warm expressions. The inclusiveness of the
talking as well as the nodding and other gestural aspects in close spatial
proximity signals to the prefrontal cortex that this type of engagement is
purposeful and satisfying. People are motivated to participate in these
productive scenarios knowing they are valued members.
It is something the person looks
forward to doing knowing that they are accepted by the members, can think
creatively to solve problems, and be a valued contributor. The fear and social
sensitive amygdala is quieted by these prefrontal cortex messages and not
threatened when a group encounter is about to transpire. The mission is high
intensity because the reward center knows that a goal can be reached and the nucleus
accumbens gets flooded with a continuous supply of the dopamine, the neurotransmitter
that keeps a person attentive as they work to achieve a reward or goal
completion. The banter stimulates the members as they near their task
completion.
I agree with Csikszentmihaly
and Hunter that students seems to be at their best when they are "able to
engage in flow activities that stretch their skills and makes them feel alive
and proud".
References
[1] Csikszentmihalyi, M., Hunter, J., 'Happiness in Everyday Life: The Uses of Experience Sampling', Journal of Clinical Psychology, p. 185-199,
2003
[2] Pentland, A., Social Physics: How Good Ideas Spread-The
Lessons from a New Science, Penguin Press, 2014
