As a precursor to talking about these ideas in a training session e.g. linking to an HR topic, I want to point to two films, both based on texts, to show how children’s books – when operating at a simple yet conceptually deep level -cross-over to being able to be enjoyed by an adult audience. I have , for a long time, championed the use of children’s books in learning/training.

The first is the beautiful book Lost and Found by Oliver Jeffers which has been made into a moving film.

The second is the recent Oscar winning film The Lost Thing, by the Australian writer/ illustrator Shaun Tan – based on the book of the same name.

There is great depth here – don’t under-estimate what is on your kids’ shelves!

First of all – find any description that is quite technical. You can find descriptions in textbooks, in glossaries, or on the web.

For example:

The (platypus) (Greek (platys), “broad”; (pous) “foot”), also duckbill, is a semiaquatic, egg-laying mammal native to Tasmania and southern and eastern Australia. The animal has a bill that resembles a duck bill but is actually an elongated snout covered with soft, moist, leathery skin and sensitive nerve endings. The body of the (platypus) is 30 to 45 cm (12 to 18 in) long; the flattened tail measures 10 to 15 cm (4 to 6 in) in length. The feet are webbed. The body and tail are covered with a thick, soft, woolly layer of fur, from which long, flat hairs protrude. The most conspicuous feature of the small head is the bill, which is about 6 cm (about 2.5 in) long and 5 cm (2 in) wide and which the animal uses for detecting prey and stirring up mud at the bottom of rivers in order to uncover the insects, worms, and shellfish on which it feeds. The head is joined directly to the body without an apparent neck. The (platypus) eyes are small, and it has no external ears, but it has keen senses of sight and hearing. Young (platypus) have rudimentary teeth; in adults the teeth are replaced by a few plates. Adult males have a hollow, spur on the inner side of the hind leg, from which a toxic fluid is ejected and which may be used as a weapon of defense. The call of the platypus is a low growl.

Next remove some words.

Give the written descriptions to trainees and ask trainees to draw the animal – it could even be an object.

Conduct the task and have a discussion about how difficult it is to follow written instructions. You could then open a discussion on how people felt when doing this task. Is there a better way of giving and receiving instructions?

Task: Draw this animal. What animal is it?

The hide is grey-brown, with a sparse covering of coarse, yellowish hair. The short, stocky body has a high arch in the back and is supported by powerful legs which are covered with dark fur. The four-toed forefeet and five-toed rear feet are equipped with long, claw like nails. The head is long and slender, terminating with a tubular, pig-like nose with numerous white hairs. The ears are large and rabbit-like, tapering to a point at the tips. The strong, muscular tail is kangaroo-like, tapering to a point. The most unique feature (of the ——) is its teeth, which in adults are found only in the back of the jaw. The actual teeth are not anchored in the jaw and grow continuously throughout the animal’s lifetime. Instead of being covered with enamel, these teeth have only a layer of cement. Or: The body is stout, with arched back; the limbs are short and stout, armed with strong, blunt claws: the ears long: the tail thick at the base and tapering gradually. The elongated head is set on a short thick neck, and at the extremity of the snout is a disc in which the nostrils open. The mouth is small and tubular, furnished with a long extensile tongue. A large individual measured 6 feet 8 inches. In colour it is pale sandy or yellow, the hair being scanty and allowing the skin to show.

Compare results. What is the animal?

This is it - an Aardvark!

You will get all manner of interesting responses. A good discussion guaranteed.

I raise these questions because I want to refer to one of the most interesting photography books I have seen recently: In almost every picture #7.

It is very unusual. It reveals, in chronological order, how Ria van Dijk , from Holland, has for almost every year from 1936,  gone to a fairground shooting gallery and taken a photo of herself – the camera taking a picture when her shot hits the target.

The progression- which excludes the war years ( a metaphor in itself) could be a most astonishing piece of performance art if performed by an established artist. It is, regardless, an astonishing example of personal biography and sheer fun. As the work progresses we not only see the changes in photographic style from a sepia style to black and white and colour ( it still seems that polaroids are used and not digital). The work  shows fashion, the changing manner of people, Ria van Dijk as she ages, and obscure yet possible references to friends, children and the eventual growth of the work into a fan club and media event ( note the camera towards the end ) and of course the release of the body of work as a book, website, exhibition, etc.

What a fun and unusual way to represent one’s life. In this particularly limited form ( not family photos, etc) we still get to read Ria van Dijk’s life.

The work is now rare and nostalgic and has become an art event – the self consciousness of the event far different from the no doubt fun and private approach of the early years.

I raise this body of work because it is most unusual and could raise many interesting ideas in a training session. Participants could look at photos and report back. What other unusual ways could one choose to represent a life?

What a fun lady. Vale Ria.

d]

Strangely, by isolating ( reframing) a scene from its original context, you have the opportunity of adding words, creating an aesthetically pleasing photo, or creating a mystery that invites discussion.

Take for example the work of Mike Mandel and Larry Sultan in their project ‘evidence’ – industrial photos suddenly appear artistic. (See Youtube lecture below-12mins mark)

Alternatively explore the work of Doug Rickard, or Michael Wolf ( his entire body of work is most interesting) who have re-appropriated Google Street View images to an artistic effect.

Doug Rickard

Michael Wolf

This interesting article talks about the appropriation of images through the years.

You can even explore police archives. The interesting forensic photography archive (blog)  within the Justice & Police Museum, created by the NSW police, invites interesting responses. Ross Gibson, part editor of this site, offers interesting creative responses to police photographs. (As with all archives some discretion may be needed – some material can be quite heavy.) Flickr Commons links to a number of archives. The rest is up to the imagination of training participants. A photo printed- and reframed – or edited on the computer – can invite many interesting responses. John Rafman’s work is intriguing.

And here’s another suggestion- the simple moving of your cursor enables you to reframe, using incredible detail,  famous works of art on the Google Art Project. What part of a picture can a person, or a team, choose? Why? What new meanings are created?

I often hear the term ‘scaffolding’ being used in relation to learning- often over-used. The term was apparently first used by Jerome Bruner in the late 1950s. This may be the most influential source: ‘Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Psychology and Psychiatry. 17.’ In another source scaffolding is defined : ‘Scaffolding implies that given appropriate assistance, a learner can attain a goal or engage in a practice otherwise out of reach (Davis & Miyake, 2004).’

It is interesting to explore the metaphors that we use in training. Respect them, their origins, their meanings, but also remain sceptical about their over-use. Metaphors are very rich. In the wrong hands we deny language its meaning and depth. Over-use language and we deny our opportunity to be imaginative.

Here is the interesting story behind Weegee’s famous photo The Fashionable People. Turns out that Weegee was very cunning. The scene was completely manipulated to create the famous contrast – the drunken woman deliberately being placed near to the lobby so that Weegee could capture the shot. At the same time the image has been cropped in order to intensify its meaning. It is not so powerful in the wider version.

I think about what happens outside the frame, instances where the meaning is quite different. In this fun Sony advert there is an imagined story of what happens outside Einstein’s famous poking tongue photo. Makes me wonder – it would be a fun exercise to get training participants to look at photos and imagine (draw) wider pictures. A good team building and mental exercise.

I like the comment ‘stories are better panoramic’.

And who would have thought that Henri Cartier- Bresson’s famous photograph Behind the Gare St. Lazare was in fact not only originally cropped by a fence post, but was manipulated to make the shot more aesthetically pleasing.

Just goes to show you – there’s often another story beyond what we see.

One example is:

How We Learn

We Learn

10% of what we READ

20% of what we HEAR

30% of what we SEE

50% of what we SEE and HEAR

70% of what is DISCUSSED with OTHERS

80% of what is EXPERIENCED PERSONALLY

95% of what we TEACH TO SOMEONE ELSE

It is often attributed to William Glasser , is used a great deal in education and training , yet let’s look a little closer.

Where does the How We Learn theory come from?

According to Will at Work Learning   the figures were ‘first published by an employee of Mobil Oil Company in 1967, writing in the magazine Film and Audio-Visual Communications.’

The figures were not based on solid research- furthermore they have been twisted and distorted ever since.

The interesting story is detailed in the above link. And oops I have been guilty of using this graph myself.

Proves that in training we need to take things with a grain of salt – or ‘a grain of whiteboard marker’ to excuse the pun.

Here are some sobering comments from famous educators to make us think twice about our use of ideas.

There have been literally hundreds and perhaps thousands of applications of my ideas educationally, both in this country and in the world. I say that with as much mystification and embarrassment as pride, because I have had almost nothing to do with it; these are things other people have done. But one thing that struck me is how incredibly superficial most of the applications have been, and one obsessive thought that’s stimulating me through this current work in education is this: I don’t want to be part of the trivialization of education.  Howard Gardner

Gazzaniga who worked alongside alongside Roger Sperry on split-brain patients said in 1985 – “How did some laboratory finding of limited generality get so outrageously misinterpreted?” – Quoted in Guy Claxton’s ‘Hare Brain Tortoise Mind.’

Learning is a much wider, richer concept than is captured within current models of education and training. – Guy Claxton in ‘Wise Up: the Challenge of Lifelong Learning.’

I find this difficult at times. Why must we always go for things that are flashy? Can engagement use simplicity?

Let me cite two examples.

I can recall a performance that I did with a theatre company which was the most engaging performance that I was ever involved in. The audience were in hysterics. Did we have a set? No. Props? No. All we had was a group of characters that we created – set in the 1950s- who were going on a car trip in the Humber Supersnipe.

The car was imagined and the only props that we had were chairs from the venue.

Why did it work?

Simply, I think, because we improvised and were on a similar level to the audience – not really knowing what was going to happen next. And the fact that we allowed the road trip  to take place in the imagination of the audience. Sure we had characterisation, sight gags, and funny interactions to draw up, yet ultimately we drew upon the experience of the audience to engage with what we were doing: a knowledge of the 1950s, family dynamics, and car journeys. A good lesson for me – you don’t always need elaborate props.

The second example concerns a recent Arts Festival in Melbourne. I went to a number of events. One was a very elaborate modern opera with a specialised soundtrack (complex computerisation driving the show). Another was a performance, by a group of twenty something young Japanese performers- subtitles projected behind – and a white set (no props) simply recounting stories of a particular weekend.

And what was the most rewarding performance? No prizes here – that of the Japanese performers.

At the end of the day- when all the bells and whistles are taken into account – a simple spoken story (narrated) and built into the mind of each audience member, can be the essence of great engagement. The simple , the traditional- basic story telling.

So, if ever you get told that bells and whistles are the basis of good engagement in training- think twice.

Think of what the audience brings to training – and reflect on this famous quote by Hitchcock: ”Transferring the menace from the screen into the mind of the audience.”

Think of what can be created in the mind of each training participant. It is much greater than we can ever achieve by lightshow or flashy presentation- “menace” not intended.

Discuss these ideas within the training session. View the video. The world is full of examples of people who do unusual things – often experiencing criticism. It is  years later , when we see the bigger picture , that we recognise how individuals break new ground – seeing things well ahead of the game. Think of examples of people who have broken new ground.