Educational Intervention in Visualizing Future Learning Organization——draft

Context

As an international student who has just arrived in Edinburgh, I have observed that many non-native English-speaking students face challenges when participating in class discussions. In seminars, native English-speaking students and teachers often swiftly enter a communication mode characterized by rapid judgment and decision-making. Conversely, some non-native international students, hindered by speaking anxiety and listening load, hesitate to contribute or struggle to maintain engagement throughout the conversation. This not only diminishes these students’ sense of participation but also impacts their relationality with peers. Consequently, this paper situates its intervention within the future learning organization visualization design session, characterized by its fast pace, extended group discussions, and the requirement to translate ideas into design proposals. It aims to encourage non-native speakers with insufficient confidence to actively participate in class and enhance their willingness to interact with peers through a cross-disciplinary collaborative activity.

Intervention Ideas & Targets

This intervention operates on the following principles: Firstly, English (2016) conceptualizes students who are “stuck” as occupying the “in-between of learning”, viewing hesitation and stagnation as transitional zones towards new understanding rather than as errors or deficiencies. This intervention supports students in articulating such “discontinuity” in learning, enabling them to gain fresh insights and progress through peer clarification. Secondly, Aldridge (2022, pp. 3-7) contends that artistic and educational spaces should prioritize creating space for diversity in sensory experiences and modes of expression. Thus, this intervention advocates treating painting and collage as equally valid forms of communication, translating language into visual blueprints. It also encourages students to incorporate body language into creative exchanges, fostering multiple communication pathways.

The primary target of this intervention is non-native English speakers—through the ‘write-then-draw’ activity model, it lowers the threshold for immediate oral expression and reduces listening pressure, thereby increasing the perceptibility of ‘being accurately understood’. The secondary focus is on native speakers—enabling them to collaborate as co-creators through role division and shared materials, utilizing multiple communication channels rather than relying solely on oral expression.

Intervention Proposal

The intervention design is as follows: Initially, students are invited to anonymously answer the following questions in a four-cell table on Miro: 1. Moments that felt stuck; 2. Cues that triggered my thinking: 3. Classroom conditions I would like to experience; 4. Future learning organization Visualization. Subsequently, students may freely respond to others’ perspectives. This phase aimed to prevent confusion or misunderstandings from hindering follow-up participation, while affording students with lower English confidence a buffer period to better absorb knowledge and prepare for the subsequent activity. The subsequent division-of-plays workshop draws inspiration from Roy Ascott’s Groundcourse Games (Sloan, 2019, pp.176–207). Students are divided into groups of three, each comprising both native and non-native speakers, to create a ‘Visualization of Future Learning Organizations’ collaboratively. During the activity, each member is restricted: one may speak but not listen; one may listen but not speak; one may draw but not listen. Moreover, two of each group must wear earmuffs. After 20 minutes, the restrictions are lifted, and students have 10 minutes to use classroom materials (such as colored cards, ribbons, balloons, and models) freely to refine their work.

In summary, this research guides students to explore more comfortable, low-threshold expression pathways for non-native speakers lacking confidence in English through diverse modes of communication. It aims to enhance relationality between non-native and native students, thereby increasing classroom participation.

References:

Aldridge, L. (2022). RBTL: Laura Aldridge. Artlink Edinburgh. https://www.artlinkedinburgh.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/RBTL_LAURA-ALDRIDGE.pd

English, A. (2016). The ‘in-between’ of learning: (Re)valuing the process of learning. In P. Cunningham & R. Heilbronn (Eds.), Dewey in our Time: Learning from John Dewey for Transcultural Practice (pp. 128-143). UCL IoE Press.

Sloan, K. (2019). Art, Cybernetics and Pedagogy in Post-War Britain: Roy Ascott’s Groundcourse (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi-org.eux.idm.oclc.org/10.4324/9780429468018