'SYNERGY SYNERGISTIC AND LEADS TO SUCCESS"

When something is synergistic, it means various parts are working together to produce an enhanced result. If you’ve just heard a synergistic symphony, the musicians must have played very well together.

Synergistic Collaborative Learning (SCL) Model strives to provide an expanded way to look at not only how people communicate, but also how they process and make meaning out of that communication leading to active learning. This process exists at all developmental levels ranging from young infant learners to mature adults. While the processes may vary slightly at each stage, the basic mechanisms behind each remains constant.

Communication theory has generally viewed human communication as being concerned with the making of meaning and the exchange of ideas and understanding between individuals. A famous quote by Harold Lasswell (1902-1978), a leading American political scientist and communications theorist sums up communication as “who says what to whom in what channel with what effect,” (Miller, Vandome, & McBrewster, 2009). While this is a very pragmatic definition, learning theorists such as John Dewey, Lev Vygotsky and Benjamin Bloom tell us how people derive meaning from communication.

SCL is built upon four basic pillars, all which stem from the theoretical frameworks of Dewey, Vygotsky and Bloom.

Learning is filtered by the Affective

Learning is a Social Process

Learning is an Active Process

Learning must become Cognitive

Let us first come up with a working definition of SCL learning. SCL is the process by which individuals, through social interactions either, find value in the message and therefore receive and integrate it into their schema and act upon it or finding the communication as irrelevant or valueless, reject it. This process may be pursued either passively or actively. In either case, a kind of learning takes place. In the case of the accepted communication, it is processed and included into those thought processes which create meaning for the individual and is usually acted upon and transmitted to others. The strength of the affective value of the communication determines to what degree which it is retained. In the case of rejected information, learning also takes place often in the form of a closure to future messages from the communicator. Again, this reaction is generally proportionate to the affective strength of the message or messenger.

Students have difficulty learning 3D geometry; spatial thinking is an important aspect of the learning processes in this academic area. In light of the unique features of virtual environments and the influence of metacognitive processes (e.g., self-regulating questions) on the teaching of mathematics, we assumed that a combination of self-regulating questions and virtual environments would enhance spatial thinking through the exercise of certain spatial abilities with the VR Spaces 1.0 software. These two methods primarily focus on the cognitive domain. In terms of learning styles, we define different cognitive characteristics. The main objective of the present study was to examine whether students with a certain learning style would benefit more from this exercise than other students. To assess the effect of these methods, a sample of 192 10th graders were randomly assigned to four groups, two of which used Virtual Spaces 1.0 (Group 1 with virtual reality and self-regulating questions, N = 52; Group 2 with virtual reality only, N = 52) while the other two used non-Virtual Spaces 1.0 (Group 3 with self-regulating questions only, N = 45; Group 4 was the non-treatment group; N = 45). The findings indicate a differential impact of virtual environments on students with different modal and personal learning styles. The post-test scores for all students (except audio students on the Aptitude Profile Test Series - Educational) were significantly higher than the pre-test scores. The unique nature of this study's findings expresses itself in the fact that the ''sensing'' students (S type) scored higher than the ''intuitive'' students (N type) on the Mental Rotation Test group 2 alone. Additionally, the scores of the visual students were higher then those of the kinesthetic style but not significantly. These findings suggest that virtual environment decreases the gap in performance results between the visual and kinesthetic students and highlight the importance of virtual environments to the ''sensing'' and kinesthetic styles.

Vygotsky stated that learning is a social activity. He even went so far as to say that very little learning can take place without social interaction. Modeling and imitation were key elements in how individuals learn and process information. Dewey, on the other hand, insisted that learning must be relevant and active. He believed that people learned best by doing. As such, the individuals created meaning (relevance) from their activities.

Finally, Benjamin Bloom created his taxonomy of learning which is broken down into the cognitive, affective and psycho-motor domains. Each domain speaks of a series of processes which are often presented as separate from each other. The cognitive processes deal with thinking and analysis, the affective with feelings and values and finally, the psycho-motor with those learning activities that are tactile in nature. Elements that are often overlooked include the inter-relationships that may exist between each of these processes. Before the cognitive domain can be engaged, the ‘learner’ must see value in what is to be learned. This relates to the affective domain. Dewey used the term relevance in relation to this affective process. Vygotsky may contend that the affective process is either enhanced or diminished (reinforced or extinguished) as a result of the perceived negative or positive nature of the interactions.

Now we come to the core of SCL theory. Each communication or interaction creates or extinguishes synergies (or channels of ideas and collaborative interactions). All synergies start out as potential synergies. The determination as if a synergy becomes active falls within the affective perceptions of each of the participants. For the moment let’s examine potential synergies and a phenomenon which, we will call the multiplier effect.Each line in the illustration to the left represents 2 potential synergies. In the top illustration, where there is an interaction between person A and person B, there are two potential synergies generated. Learning is determinant upon each parties acceptance (receiving) of the others synergy. In the second illustration, there is an interaction between persons A, B and C. You will notice that the synergies are not growing on a one to one basis; in fact, you will now observe six potential synergies. In the bottom illustration involving four individuals, twelve potential synergies are generated. Collaboration among four individuals produces our first synergistic intersection. Each intersection has the potential of generating new synergies from the established known ones.

The Synergetic Learning Model generally follows a left to right application, however, performance support is intended to support learning throughout model application. The goal of Engage (Binkerhoff & Apking, 2001; Brinkerhoff & Montession , 1995; Brinkerhoff & Mooney, 2008) is to prepare learners to become intellectually involved in a learning solution by answering four key questions:

1. What am I going to learn?

2. How am I going to apply what I’m going to learn?

3. How will what I am going to learn benefit me?

4. How will what I’m going to learn benefit the organization?

The Prepare (Choo, 2005; Spear & Mocker, 1984) phase exposes learners to new concepts and theories that are foundational to achieving the desired learning outcome. This is often accomplished through pre- reads or pre-work that take place prior to a formal learning event. Acquire (Bakken, 2002; Ende, 1983; Sheckley, Kehrhahn & Grenier, 2007) consists of applying new concepts and theories using real world examples, cases an d settings. Acquire typically includes facilitator or technology led simulations, trial and error, and real time feedback.

Reflect (Ericsson & Charness, 1997; Roberts & Bea, 2001) is a time to consider the Engage questions and answers, the Prepare concepts and theories, and the Acquire application efforts with a goal of cementing new learning and developing unresolved questions for future resolution.

Perform (Enos & Kehrhahn, 2002; Kolb, 1984; Sheckley, 2007) is the on the job application and use of new learning to improve performance by improving productivity, accuracy, results or capability.Performance Support (Gottfredson & Mosher, 2011; Hochwarter, Witt, Treadway & Ferris, 2006; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002) are the resources, processes, practices, and tools the organization provides its learners for them to learn and perform their work successfully and efficiently over time.

So, you may ask, what are synergies? Synergies are the building blocks of ideas, learning and cognitive and emotional growth. Each new line represents two communication elements leading to a potential original idea or thought. Now, let us expand this model to a very large population. Until very recently, synergetic interactions were limited to direct personal points of contact. Even in published materials, the points of contact were often mono-directional and producing single synergetic strands. With the advent of interactive media, such as the World Wide Web (WWW) (appropriately named as the Web is the network of synergies between participants) we have seen a virtual explosion of new information. The WWW is what can be referred to as a synergistic engine. There have been synergistic engines in the past as well, and the development of each engine expanded the knowledge base of the population immeasurably.

•  Spoken Language moving to cave drawings
• Cave Pictogram’s moving to a written language (hand transcribed)
• Transcribed Language moving to Printed materials (printing press)
• Printed materials being enhanced with media (telegraph, telephone, recordings, cinema, radio and television)
• Printed materials and being enhanced by Internet 1.0 (pull/push technology)
• Internet 1.0 technology being enhanced by Internet 2.0 (interactive technology, intelligent systems)

Thus far, potential synergies have been presented. It has been stated that for a synergy to become active, it must be embraced, accepted and valued. We are social creatures by nature. When a meeting lets out, most people pair up or form communication groups immediately after. It is important to observe how these groups form. Generally, people will group with those individuals who they have determined will most likely support their synergetic output. If a member of a group takes a highly offensive position, it is often the case that communication is discontinued and active synergies close. Let’s take a moment and examine public education through this filter.

With the rapid expansion of potential synergies, we should ask why much of education is still based on mono- directional, single-strand synergistic methods such as classroom lecture? Most students, from pre-K to about grade 4 or 5 seem to love school. School is fun (affective), school is social, Cognitive growth takes place at a rapid pace and learning is usually hands-on (Active). By the time the 5th grade is reached, a entirely cognitive approach to instruction is guided, even dictated, by the appearance of the standardized test.

Rapidly, desks in rows appear, learning becomes a process of memorization, practice, and rote learning. Social interactions are deemed disruptive and discouraged and, with very few cases, hands-on learning becomes limited to numerous worksheets and irrelevant homework assignments. By grade seven, a large portion of these students, have begun to shut down. School is no longer a “fun” (affectively supported) place of learning. In fact, one thing that is transmitted is the fact that learning is NOT fun. The results are failing schools (and students), escalating dropout rates and diminished levels of learning on both qualitative and quantitative levels.

SCL hopes to address these issues, examine each component and create a system of learning that is Affective, Social, Active, and Cognitive but more importantly, Effective. A self-examination of teaching should be undertaken based upon what we know about learning, rather than upon what has always been done.

How to enhance Synergistcreativity and collaboration in teams

1. Talent. It’s crucial to have the right people on your team capable of adding their brilliance to the project. Collaboration works best when team members have complimentary skill sets required to complete the project. To create innovation that your customers actually want, consider collaborating with them, as well as with experts within your organization, including tech, design, marketing, and finance. This will help you access collective intelligence and make informed decisions.
2. Healthy relationships are at the heart of collaboration. Appreciating others, engaging in purposeful conversations and the ability to resolve conflicts are essential ingredients for collaboration. Find ways for the team to get to know each other not just as professionals, but as human beings, to build trust and provide occasions for informal social interaction. The easiest way to do this is to share meals together.
3. A guiding vision and clarity of purpose are key to collaboration. Warren Bennis said “Great Groups think they are on a mission from God… Their clear, collective purpose makes everything they do seem meaningful and valuable.” Use storytelling and imagery to engage the hearts and minds of your team.
4. Provide a clear mission objective. Team members jointly prepare a written purpose statement for their collaboration and define rules of engagement which include goals, roles, responsibilities, and deliverables. Communicate how decisions are made.
5. Connect the project with big picture company objectives. Create meaning and value for the organization and customers.
6. Create an atmosphere of safety, trust and respect. Encourage multiple perspectives, diverse viewpoints, and creativity. Keep members energised through stimulating, quality discussions around cutting edge issues.
7. Make your ideas visible and tangible by building prototypes, or drawing diagrams so everyone can see what you mean.
8. Provide an infrastructure and resources that enable learning, communication and collaboration. Address cultural issues that defeat collaboration.
9. Provide great leadership. Nurture the brilliance of your people and do everything you can to remove barriers to high performance. Avoid being too autocratic and allow time for the team to weigh in on decisions. Help build team connections across the organization. Give credit where credit is due and recognize team performance as well as individuals.
10. Use coaching to reinforce a collaborative culture. Coaching for improved teamwork, emotional intelligence, and navigating difficult conversations can produce dramatic improvements to the group. Ask open-ended questions like Why? What if? What else? and How might we? to open up dialogue and tap into creativity.
11. Add zest factors. (Hargrove) Make collaboration fun, and celebrate completions before moving on.
12. Capture best practices and mistakes to learn from. Publish on your intranet or wiki to give everyone access to your wisdom.

When is it a bad idea to collaborate?

Don’t collaborate for the sake of collaborating. Sometimes all you need is cooperation. As Morten Hansen asserts in his book, Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid the Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Results asserts: “The goal of collaboration is not collaboration, but far better results.” The only reason to collaborate is to add or create value; to achieve things collectively that you cannot achieve individually.