Archives

Thinking Differently About Lectures: Sandel’s Justice Lecture at Harvard

What I am going to talk about has absolutely no practical value. Once you accept that fact it allows you to have a more open view of things.
Paul Dietz, in introduction to a lecture in algorithms class

I’m currently participating in a course about teaching at the university level. During the course today, participants referred to the limited interaction that is possible in lectures (compared to seminars). It reminded me of the “Justice” lectures by Michael Sandel at Harvard and an old blog posting I wrote in another (currently offline) blog. I find Sandel’s “presentation” style very inspiring (albeit sometimes taxing) and a creative solution for dealing with large classes. It’s a little bit off-topic for this blog, but I would relate it to conveying ideas to large audiences.

Here’s his first lecture as an example, with an description about his style below:

Sandel asks the question “What’s the right thing to do?” and uses contemporary examples to illustrate different moral positions by philosophers like Bentham, Mill, Kant, Aristotle, Rawls. His low-key “presentation style” (a mixture of lecturing and highly-but-indirectly structured discussion) is remarkable.

After watching the twelve episodes and another presentation to the same topic I found the following attributes to be very interesting:

Well-Timed speech

He speaks slowly and makes pauses in the right moments. This gives students time to think about the sentences. He also repeats what students have said in his own words, which gives him and others time to think about it.

Suiting movements

Similar to his low-key speech he walks around slowly when he is not behind the lectern. This gives him some dynamic but is in accordance to the topic of the course.

Shows everyday relevance of the issues

He continuously makes connections to every day life and makes clear what is at stake in philosophy. This is necessary to allow participation because students can imagine themselves in these situations and makes the philosophical positions relevant and concrete instead of purely abstract. He continuously links concrete examples to abstract positions and vice versa, allowing students to see it in abstract, general and concrete, special cases.

Encourages participation

There are several strategies used to encourage participation:

  • He makes it clear that the topics can be discussed by the students. For example, in the first lecture when he dismisses skepticism and throughout the course when he lets the students challenge their positions. He also mentions when philosophers give strange reasons and shows them that they can be criticized.
  • He asks for the names of the contributors and mentions them when he refers to the same arguments. This brings the names of the students in the same line as the philosophers they are analyzing and shows them that the philosophers can be criticized by them.
  • He asks them what they think personally, “how you would rule”, without having to resort to laws. When they say what others might think he returns them to their own opinion by asking: “But what do you think?” or by finding out via a quick vote.
  • He reinforces the students speaking by paraverbal signals (e.g., nods) and verbally (“right”, “yes”). He continuously gives the feedback that he understands what they say, but not necessarily that he agrees with their opinion. If a student has problems stating his opinion, he supports them.
  • He reinforces students for each contribution by thanking them and — in some cases — recognizing that their contribution was not easy because it dealt with difficult moral positions (like agreeing to eat a crew mate). For example, he uses sentences like “You did well. It’s a hard question.” or “Brave answer. Thank you.”. He also thanks them for questions (e.g., “interesting you should ask …”, “interesting suggestion”).
  • He also tells them when they divert from philosophers but tells them they might be right and the philosophers might be wrong. For example, in the presentation at Duke Sanford School: “That makes sense [pause] but it’s not Aristoteles reason.” “Argh” “That’s all right. You might be right and he might be wrong. We’ll see.” He also says when something is partially right (“reason is deserving but …”).
  • If there is a vote, he raises his hand every time which could be interpreted as voting for it and might encourage others to stand by their opinion and raise their hands. He also makes it clear that the vote is not just for fun (or so that we have done something “interactive”) but summarizes the results, often interprets what this means, and refers to it later in the lecture. Consequently, it actually makes sense for students to participate in the vote. He also notices who raised his hand in an issue and sometimes asks the person later.
  • He also refers the answers students give to other students who have brought a conflicting or similar point earlier (hence he is asking for the name of the person who speaks). While he is still monitoring the discussion and highly structures it, it leaves the students engaged in the discussion because it’s not “lecture – one question – one answer – lecture” but actually a kind of discussion among the students. It has the further beneficial effect that he does not criticize them himself (which would probably reduce further participation) but lets the students being criticized by their peers.
  • Even if a student completely smashes what he was aiming for, he takes it with humor, concedes the point and moves on (“interesting idea except that it wrecked the philosophical point”). It shows pretty clearly that students can participate even if they say something the lecturer does not like.

Minding the overall course of the discussion, lecture, course

The whole discussion serves the goal of the course (as it should) and is structured by him to achieve this goal.

  • While the students are encouraged to participate it is neither participation without consequence nor without direction. If a student mentions something he was aiming for he reinforces the direction (a “Good point. Who has another reason …” compared to an “Good. Who has an answer for …”). He also stops students immediately when they brought the point he was aiming at. If the discussion is not moving in the right direction, he asks specific questions to further sharpen the issue and lead to the points he was aiming at.
  • Students bring the philosophical points and he uses their positions to illustrate these points more formally. It looks like he has a roadmap in mind, but instead of driving on a superhighway from A to B he lets students explore the territory and gives (gentle) nudges to make sure they find the landmarks. This is especially noticeable when he moves the discussion on a meta level and describes how the discussion evolved and what it means in the context of the philosopher discussed.
  • He also connects the different lectures and gives a short recap what was doe the last time, including mentioning the results of votes or the positions of students he names. It is clear for the students that the course is going somewhere.
  • I think the main point he makes regarding his course is that philosophical questions can and should be discussed and not left to non-state organizations like churches. And he achieves this point well — he summarizes his opinion in the last presentation and shows the students that they have done so during the whole semester showing that it can be done, and should be done.

Keeps the discussion personally relevant but in a personal distance

Given that he makes the philosophical positions personally relevant he also has to make sure that students keep a certain emotional distance in the discussion (e.g., to avoid ad hominem arguments). This was very obvious when one student asked another whether he had ever engaged in masturbation. He intervened and asked her to make the point in the third person. But also in earlier discussions, e.g., when one student argued against Affirmative Action programs for Blacks but for Legacy Admissions to Harvard, he did not ask the student whether he himself was only accepted to Harvard due to Legacy Admission.

I think the only criticism regarding the lectures is that it becomes harder to follow when he is reading at the lectern. Standing freely in front of the students and arguing for certain points he does extremely well, but I have yet to see and hear a lecturer who can hold my attention while reading a text behind a lectern.

By the way, the technical quality of the videos is also remarkable, given that they were made for TV. The video is crystal clear (in HQ), the sound quality excellent, and the camera work professional and well framed/cut (although I would be very angry if a camera man would be filming my lecture notes). I think the only criticism I have regarding this point is that it looks too flashy (especially the teasers) — like a report you would see on TV (for which it was for). It might suggest that the lecture is “only” entertainment, something videos are likely to suggest (cf. Salomon, 1984). It actually helped me not to look on the screen too much.

All in all, very interesting, very stimulating and a good example that even formal education in philosophy does not have to be boring. You can find the lectures here:

Literature

Salomon, G. (1984). Television is “easy” and print is “tough”: The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 647-658.

Make sure you can do your To-Dos within any given day

Well, unlooking the secrets of the brain took a lot longer than I expected.
Lewis Robinson in “Meet the Robinsons”

One important advice regarding “to do” lists is that whatever you put on it, you should be able to do it in relatively short time. About 30 minutes. Otherwise, it’s not a todo-list, it’s a reminder. There is nothing wrong with reminders, but they serve a different function.

For example, imagine a todo like “read literature about topic x” or “grade essays in course y” — that’s a reminder. It is unlikely that you can do it in a day and it will stay on your todo list at the end of the day — very discouraging.

On the other hand, suppose there’s a todo like “read Goodwin, 2006″, or “grade essay: Miller” and “grade essay: Jenkins”. That’s a todo, providing Goodwin is short enough to be read within a normal work day.

Todos, whether you keep them on paper or in OmniFocus or Things, should be something you can do. There should be a lot of movement in your todos and at the end of the day, you should have done our todos for today.

So, never put something on your todo list that you cannot do in the given day — keep a separate reminder list for that and use your todo list only for your todos.

Using Excel for Biographical/Chronological Information

“Yes. It’s a strange feeling, Kha’Mak, to know suddenly that all the decisions in your life have brought you to this place. There is no longer doubt or uncertainty. The future now consists of only three probabilities. … In the moment that I strike, the Emperor and I will both die. Or he will die and I will spend my life in prison. Or I will fail and be killed. For the first time in my life, the path is clear.”
[...]
“I was ready. I had prepared myself. I had made my peace with the universe, put all my affairs in order. I had the dagger in my hand! And he has the indecency to start dying on his own. Never in my life have I seen a worse case of timing.”
G’Kar in Babylon 5: “The Coming of Shadows”

I’m not a fan of Excel, but I’ve seen an interesting presentation a while ago (sorry, lost the source) in which the author described how he wrote a biography of a famous person (I think it was Martin Luther King, Jr.) by using Excel.

He created an Excel file and used one column to write down information that happened at a specific time in the life of this person, and another column to write down the exact date. After intensive research he had a very long Excel file and the sorting function of Excel ordered all the events in the correct chain of events. I’m not sure, but I think another column was for meta information, like the importance of the event. This way it becomes very easy to make sense of chronological information.

There are limitations (doesn’t Excel cap the amount of letters in each cell?), but it sounds like a very good and easily available starting point. You can research without having to worry about the correct order, as long as you write down the exact date (2012-07-22, or 2012-07-xx if the day is unknown, etc.). And of course, you can easily copy the columns and paste them into a text file and then into an content outliner like Circus Ponies Notebook or OmniOutliner.

Of course, there are similar solutions, like using a database and using one filed for the date, or using a multiple column outliner like OmniOutliner.

So, using Excel (or any other program) in this way is a very specific solution when you get information in more or less random order but the events have a very specific date. If you work with this kind of information, using Excel this way might actually be helpful.

Outliner in Scrivener vs Outliner in Circus Ponies Notebook — Structure (Scrivener) vs Content (CPN) Outlines

In all affairs it’s a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.
Bertrand Russell

I got the following question from Carsten yesterday:

“you have mentioned Circus Ponies Notebook as an outliner. Scrivener has an integrated outliner – what are the advantages of outlining with Circus Ponies Notebook’s compared to outlining with Scrivener?”

It’s a good question, because there is a fundamental difference between Scrivener‘s outliner and an outliner like the outliner pages in Circus Ponies Notebook or of OmniOutliner.

Let’s have a look at the outliner in Scrivener first:

scrivener-outline

Scrivener Outline View (left: Binder, right: Outline View)

As you can see, each “cell” (= line) in the outliner view of Scrivener is a “file”. It shows you more information like label, status and (not shown) even part of the content, but it is — essentially — the Binder in another format. It’s a view on the structure of your document. If you double-click on a line, you open that file:

scrivener-design

After clicking on a "cell" in the Outline View of Scrivener

Now compare this with the outliner in Circus Ponies Notebook:

cpn-outline

Outline in Circus Ponies Notebook

In Circus Ponies Notebook you can use one cell for one information unit (an idea, a quote, etc.). It is much more fine-grained. Like in Scrivener, you can fold (collapse) cells so that all subcells are hidden.

cpn-data

Very useful for a hierarchical structuring of information.

Circus Ponies Notebook also allows you to add images and summarize information in the parent cells (here for example the “interest for nanotechnology” cell which contains detailed information about the four groups, complete with an image of the ANOVA and the detailed statistical values). Great for summarizing what complex analysis say and seeing only the summary during the writing process.

cpn-images-xls

Support any file type.

You can also add files, here for example and image and the Numbers document it is based on.

cpn-quellen

Each cell can be tagged with the source information of the content of that cell.

And — very important for academic writing — you can tag each cell with a keyword, which can be used to stick the source information to any quote or information you want to use in your article or thesis. In the image above for example one cell is tagged with “Hawkey, R. (2004)” and contains some information what I wanted to use from this source. The cells tagged with Borwoske (2005) contain direct quotes (italics). See Circus Ponies Notebook for Academic Writing (e.g., Thesis Writing) for more information.

Of course the cells can be shifted around, copied and pasted, and if done correctly (simple copy and paste) the tags stay attached to the cell. Very, very useful. You can also collect information in a dedicated notebook and copy and paste the cells in a new notebook, in which you put what you need for writing the article. And given that you can add a checkbox to each cell you can always stop and resume writing and know where you stopped. I strongly recommend using meta information, for example what should be in a section or what should be clear after reading a section, in the outline. If you look at the first Circus Ponies Notebook image in this posting, you see orange text as a child cell under the Method section parent cell (“show what was done …”) and likewise as a child cell under the Design parent cell (“begins with an overview …”). Sometimes it is hard to remember during writing what a section is supposed to accomplish and this meta information (in another color and with checkboxes) is a tremendous help.

So, in Scrivener one outline “cell” is actually a text file — it is a structure outline. Very good to get an overview of the document, see which “sections” need work (e.g., status as First Draft, Word Count). But even if you display the content of this cell in the outline view, a single “cell” (= line) usually contains more than one idea, which makes it very hard to change the structure as sentences tend to stick together. Thus, it is very useful for higher order structuring like part, chapter, subchapter, even on a paragraph level. But you probably wouldn’t want to use it on an argument/idea/information unit level. Personally I went so far to use separate files for subsections, but not for paragraphs, i.e., one subsection (like the “Design” section below) contains multiple paragraphs and ideas.

scrivener-design

A "cell" = text file in Scrivener contains more than one idea ... here, multiple paragraphs.

In Circus Ponies Notebook one cell contains one unit of information/one idea/argument. If I have taken it from another source, the source information is tagged to that cell (assigned as keyword, which can be views with cmd + k). This kind of content outline is made to have its cells reordered, folded in, shifted around. I change and simplify the structure during the planing phase when I put information in this content outline by summarizing subcells in their parent cells (e.g., multiple sources say the same, the parent cell thus contains a summary). When writing I can use the summary or go into the details, depending on how much space I have during writing.

reducing-extraneous-load

Circus Ponies Notebook (left) next to Scrivener (right) -- a very good combination.

In practice, both types of outlines combine perfectly, and although in almost every case, a content outline is also a structure outline, it is helpful to use Scrivener and the Structure Outline for writing. I start with Circus Ponies Notebook to create the content outline, make sure I have all information available in it and the structure works (thread/story). Then I fire up Scrivener, use the Binder to create a structure outline (on a higher level, see image), put the Circus Ponies Notebook content outline next to the Scrivener file and start writing.

Circus Ponies Notebook excels when it comes to keeping the content available, giving me the source information (keywords), allowing me to fold in information that I do not need (e.g., level of detail is too high), and having cells with checkboxes, which allows me to easily stop and resume my work.

Scrivener excels in writing, especially making Snapshots of prior versions, giving me word counts, and quickly jumping between places in the document (via the Binder of Scrivener which only contains the higher level structure and the text files).

What do you live for?

“It’s easy to find something worth dying for. Do you have anything worth living for?”
Lorien in Babylon 5: “Whatever Happened to Mr. Garibaldi?”

I’m currently working on the second edition of my “Organizing Creativity” book. It is still about half the amount of pages as the first edition, but new topics do get in. One — rather accidental — topic is related to setting priorities. If you are creative, chances are, there are different projects you can work on, and there is a lot more to do than you have time in your life. So there are a few lines on “having to many interests” (and how to deal with them) and about “Setting Priorities” (for which an idea collection is actually a great help — and very soothing). However, I also went a step further up — and that question is “What do you live for?”.

The longer I have spend in my working life, the more I notice that — at least today and in Western society — it is meaning in our life that we need, that drives us, that motivates us. A vision of something to accomplish, a personal mission to achieve (or at least contribute to) this vision, which tells you what kind of knowledge and skills you need, and how to evaluate whether you are successful in achieving it.

Or to put in a diagram (very simplified, of course, your knowledge and skills also define your vision and mission):

vision-to-outcome-small

Thing is, everyone has to find for him- or herself what their vision and mission is. And what they can contribute to it. But whereas this might be difficult, the good thing is, you can define it for yourself. It is much more difficult in the work setting, where others have to set this vision and define the organizations mission. Many organizations do not do it, or make it transparent, or make it believable (and the only way to do it is to really believe in it). And if this is missing people stay below their potential. I think this is one reason why so many people like to be creative in their leisure time, because then they can at least contribute to one vision, to make the world a little better for others.

But even then, the question remains: Your time here is limited, so, what do you live for?

Why Complete Freedom Is Not a Good Idea

“I’m free. Free of rules and reports, free of this life.”
“Free of life. Got another name for that – dead.”
Buffy, after becoming invisible, and Spike in “Buffy – The Vampire Slayer”

One thing that I always found strange is that some people wish to be completely free in what they do to be really creative. Not being forced to develop things for others, being forced to adhere to deadlines, or create remittance work.

It sounds strange, but I think that as much as we might wish complete freedom, it can actually be very bad for creativity. This might sound like betrayal if you are working in tight constraints, but consider it this way: if you had complete freedom, it would also mean that …

… no one gives you any feedback or issues any desires of things that might be interesting,

… no one cares what you do, because otherwise they would influence you, and

… you would not learn from anyone, because they would also influence you.

And without this, how can you develop yourself? So, in this regard perhaps some constraints, some deadlines, and some vested interest by others isn’t all bad.

That part apart

“Whatever happened to me in my life, happened to me as a writer of plays. I’d fall in love, or fall in lust. And at the height of my passion, I would think, ‘So this is how it feels,’ and I would tie it up in pretty words. I watched my life as if it were happening to someone else. My son died. And I was hurt, but I watched my hurt, and even relished it, a little, for now I could write a real death, a true loss. My heart was broken by my dark lady, and I wept, in my room, alone; but while I wept, somewhere inside I smiled. For I knew I could take my broken heart and place it on the stage of The Globe, and make the pit cry tears of their own.”
William Shakespeare in Neil Gaiman’s “The Sandman” (1996) (from Wikiquote)

Creative people are often chided as living “in their heads”, yet, as aptly put in the quote above. However, I think that a part of them is always apart from themselves, yet watching the world (including the one inside their heads) intensively. There is some kind of meta-process that is always running in the background, and that is pointing out interesting things. It is similar to metacognition (thinking about thinking), but also unconscious at times. This part apart watches, observes, makes notes, makes connections, and sees new things appear out of the old. It might even point out things about other people’s creative works, e.g., why a book managed to have the effect is has on you, how the author managed to build a huge story with only a few pages, what he did tell in a chapter, what he referred to, and what he only implied.

It does not seem like an ingredient for a happy life, it can spoil some situations. Personally, I find it hard to stop this background process, and only a few things like sleep, sex, (legal) drugs, or some kinds of music can stop it — for a moment. In this moment it becomes possible to live in the moment, until a part takes this observer role again. And I do not want to stop it too often, it provides a very useful perspective.

What do you think — is this something that creative people must have? All creative people, or only a selected subgroup? And are there other ways to be creative?

Not perfect? Try Again.

Assiduus usus uni rei deditus et ingenium et artem saepe vincit.
(Constant practice devoted to one subject often outdoes both intelligence and skill.)
Cicero

A few weeks ago, I went to a Botanical Garden with a very interesting young woman … to take photos. We are both still (and will always be) learning how to take photos, so only some photos turned out fine, but even most of those were only almost good. There often was this tiny detail that looms large if you know where to look: A wrong splotch of color in the background, the sharpness a little bit off, these kinds of things. Digital photography allows you to see the photos on the camera screen immediately after you take them, yet the quality and size of the screen is usually not good enough to notice all these tiny flaws (and the next motif is already calling). But it is a Botanical Garden, the plants will not run away, and at least the tropical flowers will look almost the same — why not visit it again?

I think you learn a lot when you revisit the same motif again. Just make sure you remember what you wanted to avoid. An easy way to remember is using a template, e.g., in PowerPoint or Keynote, and simply annotate what you want to avoid. You can define an image area and text field for the meta data and points to adhere to with this motif. After adding the image, highlight the issues on the photo and write the main points on the slide:

phototemplate_500

Export the slides as images (jpg) and put them on your mobile phone or your camera (try it out in advance, not all cameras accept .jpgs that were edited), or simply print it (you can print more than one slide on a page, 6 per page usually work fine). In contrast with simply leaving the images on your camera, you do not have to think on the set which points to adhere to, and if you put them on your mobile phone or print them, you do not scroll through the photos again and again.

You will probably make new mistakes when you revisit the same setting (things to avoid next time), and some things might be different (damn plants, and these are slow to move ;-) ). But there is no reason why a photographer should not revisit her motifs like a writer would rewrite a text. And I think it is a great way to become better.

Update

A good book to help you evaluate images is “Vom Alltäglichen zum Besonderen: Bilder auf den Punkt gebracht” by Michael Jordan (not that Michael Jordan). Apparently it’s only available in German, but the author shows images and highlights areas of improvement (similar to the slide above, and I guess that’s where I got the idea before transferring it to immediately improving your next photos by revisiting the motif and taking your annotations with you in an easy way to help you remember what to do). You can look into the book but you have to turn a few pages to see the example photos with his annotations.

‘Unleashing’ Creativity

I never did anything worth doing by accident; nor did any of my inventions come by accident; they came by work.
Thomas Alva Edison

I got an interesting comment today:

pls provide tips for unleashing creativity

It has always been my position in this blog that ideas ‘just come’ when you spend time working on a topic, and that the main problem is not getting ideas but getting good ideas that you realize. Organizing Creativity is all about that and as succinctly put in this poster, I believe it is not only possible but needed to achieve great works.

But what if you do not get ideas automatically? A colleague of mine once told me that he thinks that great artists recognize when something either is interesting from an artistic point of view or has the potential to be interesting. A musician who is inspired by some sounds in his environment for a great tune or a photographer who suddenly stops because he sees a great motif would be perfect examples. These people can benefit hugely by organizing their finds. But if you do not belong to these people — what do you do then?

Frankly, good question, I have no idea. I have included creativity techniques. You find them in the HTML version of the first book, or in its PDF, and they are also in the draft version of the second book. But whereas I think that these ‘techniques’ can give you ‘an excuse’ to spend time ‘just thinking’ about a problem, I also think that they are totally useless unless you really, really know the subject.

Heinlein coined the acronym TANSTAAFL (There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch). This is also true for creativity. You can’t imagine it as a wild dog that you simply ‘unleash’ and that will do the work for you. You have to work yourself first, to get the materials to work with, and afterwards, to implement the ideas you had.

Time to Improve the Infrastructure

One cool judgment is worth a thousand hasty counsels.
The thing to do is to supply light and not heat.
Woodrow Wilson

It the time between the years — a time when things cool down, usually. It’s a time of remembering and looking in the future — and a good time to put an end to the tiny things that bugged you this year and that you do not want to carry into the next. The tiny annoyances, the small things that bug you enough to notice yet are below the threshold to actually do something about them.

If you think back at the past year, which things did bug you? Think on all the times it did bug you, tiny bites each, but taken together … now is the time to change it.

So, time to take out the trash, fix that leaking faucet, quit the subscription to that newsletter and to sort some newspaper clippings (and much much more).

Have fun & happy holidays :-)