---

In this section you will right now find a flow of texts that are created in relation to a forum for collaborative learning

In the interface of learning, pedagogy, research and art, I will as an expression of “living life as art” in a series of reflections take a meta-perspective on how it is to perform in different roles and contexts to teach, learn, inquire and create – as an art in itself. In one role, profession and situated interaction we often draw from experience and knowledge that in a “fictional constructed sense” we call and have categorised as different disciplines and fields of knowledge or professions (N. Bateson, 2017), but that in real life and practice, everything convers with absolutely everything over time and space all the time, not asking for permission from no board of direction, no curriculum or subject specific definition. N. and G Bateson present it as a transcontexual inter-dynamic. N. Bateson cites her father G. Batson in Steps to an ecology of mind (G. Bateson, 1987), when he coins the word trans-contextual and describes its contextually nested reality in this way “Exogenous experiences framed in the contexts of dream, and internal thought may be projected into the contexts of the external world”, and she means that he mistrusts us to seek for this trans-contextual interconnectivity, partial explanations in learning and experience (N. Bateson, 2017b, p. 79). N. Bateson suggests the notion of transcontextual descriptions, to open up new pathways to “better understand the interdependency that characterizes living (and arguably) non-living systems” (N. Bateson, 2017b, p. 79). She means that everything is never “not” learning, as it is a participatory, interrelated multi-contextual whole. Learning is not in itself connected to good or bad outcomes. Vitae she suggests is a better word for the part – because the thinking of parts and wholes blinds us to the developing interactions that take place in life. “The ‘parts,’ like members of a family, organs in a body, or species in a jungle, exist – inside – and are integral to – larger evolutionary processes” (N. Bateson, 2017b p.169). Her concepts of symmathesy (learning together) can be apply to co-creative ensemble work or any learning-educational context; An entity forming over time by contextual mutual learning through interaction. For example, an eco-system. Symmathesize means to generate contextual mutual learning through the process of interaction between multiple variables in a living entity” (N. Bateson, 2017b p.169). 

One challenge for teacher and learners in the presence of this multidimensional liminal in-between memories from the past and imaginings of the future, for example lies in creating a pedagogical social quality of interactivity – a mutual learning culture – that invites individuals as a group (in different roles) to become a resource for each other that makes it easier, deeply motivating and interesting to learn and discover. Learn and invent ourselves in a way that expand us as cultural, ecological and social beings, not just socializes or make us fit into an already fixed cultural understanding or behaviour as such. This immediately throws us into something much more complex than just doing a certain method, certain exercises with defined goals, aims or desired results. It throws us into an art embedded in the intrinsic nature of life itself, manifesting materialising through us as integral participants, like …. In this first series of reflections, different aspects of this ecology of complexity and perspectives will be addressed that has come up, in relation to also taking on the challenge to learning and teaching through the online medium. 

Biesta, in his writing on the theme of going beyond education and learning (Biesta, 2006, p. 7) re-configures some important interconnections in order to enter into “what it means to be human as a radically open question, one that can only be answered through an engagement in education, not as a question that has to be answered before you can start educating”. He is in my understanding also concerned about how our autopilot, insensitive behaviour (incorporated habitus (Bourdieu, 1993), of operating culturally and individualized collective versions of ourselves), as well as the reductionist mindsets of result orientation, economisation of the language of pedagogy and education (Biesta, 2006, p 28) will rob us of our genuine meeting between the edges and horizons of you, and me and the world (Whyte, 2021), in which “we break into the world as unique individuals through our way of carefully respond to that and them that are different to us.” (Biesta, 2006, p. 7). He does not mean this in a trivial sense of politely listening from the surface to different opinions, but in the deep and difficult sense of destabilizing the known in an act of discovering, cultivating the aliveness in differentiations as an act of passionately co-creating yourself in collaboration with the other, the otherness and the rhizomatic unique plateaux’s of every living participation of life ( Biesta, 2006, Deleuze and Guattari). The poets Davit Whyte (2021), in the same spirit – sugges us all being each one a unique artform – in life becoming at interior-exterior edges and horizons, the inner and outer symmetries.

In an online course about online teaching approach through a method of problem-based learning, the concepts of being a visitors or residence when it comes to be a beginner in or already familiar with operating on-line with on-line techniques, has been used to open to the fact that it takes something different to be carried and carry out what you want online, and you can be more or less used to, skilled, educated or autodidact in this literacy, but it is not fixed who can learn to do so… you can take a growth perspective to learning as presented by (Dweck, ), who one participant has made us acquainted with. In a growth mind-set to learning, you are rather than failing, “just not there yet”, which reminds me of the concept of (). I have found that helpful, as it takes away the pre-determining effect of the earlier concepts that has become common language and talks about pre-disposed generational differences in terms of being either a native or immigrant to the online literacy (White & Cornu, (2011). So, writing this blog, suddenly feels like a creatively possible thing to do as I have pierced through the either-or veil and starts to experiment with how I can exist online, in ways that I can chose to co-create, on more critical and informed terms. But it also provides another possibility in the light of art, and creativity…and the frames for learning opened by Biesta, Whyte (not Whites), Bateson, that it can be a very good thing to become a visitor again and again in your own universe as you become blinded by your habitual residency eyes, that only sees what they already think they knows… as not knowing is a pre-requisite for learning something new. That brings together the edge of knowing and not knowing to both the horizon of innovating and to the horizon of beginning of building relationships in a group and learning about new grounds of the on-line world.

The first theme in the course opening the vulnerabilities of creating a learning culture, an ambiance together which can allow for feeling just very insecure and bring you into a community, rather than feeling alone in this predicament, as in all social beginnings in a group. Vulnerability, deep listening, courage to invite and step in, and serious playfulness are being brough into dialogue to open this portal or bow of invitation into the collaborative learning process. For me, in the frame of creativity, art and pedagogy, relating to the premises for play is a resource. there are three premises through which play, and the magic of play is upheld, and also fall apart if any of them are broken; consent, reciprocity and taking turns (Knutsdotter – Olofsson, 2003) in Swedish SÖT – (samförstånd, ömsesidighet och turtagning.)

• it means we need to have some mutual understanding about where and about what, and how we are playing in order for everyone to be able to contribute and have a chance to step in 
• and the reciprocity is a quality that requires the authenticity and honest invitation of the other, using your receptive and active imagination to create space in the play for the other, as well as suggest and share your own contribution and what your desire is
• taking turns is of course on one level easy, because you can make rules for that, but on the other hand, understood as a spontaneous quality from with rather than a controlling quality from without, it has much more to do with improvisational skills of interchanging leading and following in ways that drives the exploration in interesting ways. 

The trust I think, all comes back to the qualities that we feel in the collective field of attentiveness an atmosphere of genuine openness to “not knowing, and the invitation to curiously discover in order to come to know” as well as holding a space for each other from a certain level of understanding, knowing and ability to co-create the learning opportunities by each one being a space for others in which they can become. Different structuring rules of engagement, and very practical pedagogical entrances can be organised for this.

Different principles and characteristics of play are applied both directly and indirectly to build a generative field in the use of games, rules of engagements and enacting. In teacher trainings the indirect understanding of the function of play for children and their own professional scaffolding role is important. But play and playfulness can translate to adult creativity, learning and meaning-making in establishing collaborative climates for learning in professional developmental processes. I align myself with the perspective of Marjanovic-Shane (2010, p. 42) when she goes beyond the focus of competences created through play and into the ‘ontology of being a player’ in which she “looks at the meaning and significance of playing for the interpersonal relationships between the participants and the view, opinions and feeling that the participants construct about the immediate situation, events in which they participate, and themselves”. The third potential space Heikkinen (2005) sees in drama is a play that in itself gives rise to the formation of a shared and common culture that has the power to re-cultivate the existing culture. Marjanovic-Shane (2010, p. 43) formulates a transpiring spirit and auditing position in play between participants of any age, beyond being a character in a dramatization, in which “participants in play are seen as the collaborators in creating and directing their actual relationships, judgements, values and even rules.” (from Bragby, 2020).

Having, as many with me, taught online since last year, trying to transmit the ambience and interactive formats of applied theatre and drama, has been a real challenge, as it implies a lot physical, embodied presence and the ability to see, feel, hear and sense each other, the “whole context and the room, and simultaneously with others experiencing and observing those interior-exterior edges happening in subtle ways. The way to deep listening and the courage to step into role-play showed itself in very surprising new coinciding way online. At a certain point, as I was thriving to create a connection of focusing, safe space in how to see each other and stay in contact through the zoom format, doing a role play exercise, suddenly turning the view of each other off, became a very “safe space” for the participants, in which they more effortlessly dared to “play” fully”, sensed they were listened to, but not stared at in an exposed way. The conversation between the interior private space of “not being seen”, but fully perceived, materializing as a possible rule of engagement on-line, became a portal to dare to express and share one-self in surprising ways.

I think that the same frontiers between how to invite the vulnerability and creating indirect safe spaces becomes open in the questions about how to be private/public on the internet, only the contextual environment for building these trusts and experiencing them are different… I sometimes feel that it is an environment that you need to learn to be indirectly vulnerable in…. especially in more public contexts where you just do not know who the listener/visitor is… for example… and when you are in a more contained room in which you can be a residence to different degrees, it is often builds on having built relation beforehand “irl” or not…Visitor or residence…there is still this question about a less sensitive attention quality…and I think a real need for pedagogical creativity and framing to create the trust and deeper relating – depending on the purpose of the activity of course… are the same challenges but mediated through new mediums and applying the rules of engagement to that.

Some of the extraordinary exiting possibilities with the online, virtual realities I want to explore is for example the multimodal expressiveness, that opens another level of communicative universe… what on-line tools may picture and mediate the live ongoing relational togetherness, materiality and non-materiality in all its continuum spectrum of discernible differences that makes a difference (Bateson, ) as one gestalt. 

I am on my way to explore that mission impossible….

Bateson, G. (1987). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. Northvale, N. J: Jason Aronson. 

Bateson, N. (2017a). Contextual research and new forms of information. Retrieved May 28, 2017 from https://norabateson.wordpress.com/author/norabateson/ 

Bateson, N. (2017b). Small arcs of larger circles: Framing through other patterns.Axminster, United Kingdom. Triarchy Press. 

Bragby, K. (2020). Presence that makes a difference: cultivating a transformative agency in education through research-based applied theatre and drama (Doctoral dissertation). University of Chester, UK.

Bourdieu, P. (1993) Socio-cultural texts. Stockholm, Sweden: Brutus Östlings Symposium.

Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus. Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Dweck, C. (2021), online ted-talk, retrieved 21.03.23 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiiEeMN7vbQ&t=9s

Heikkinen, H. (2005). Serious playfulness in drama pedagogical genres. (Allvarlig lekfullhet i dramapedagogiska genrer). In A.-L. Östern, L. Risan, M. Strandberg, & S. A. Eriksson, Drama, dramaturgy and cultural literacy. (Drama, dramaturgi och kulturell läsfärdighet) (pp. 25-33). Publication Nr 10, Vasa, Finland: Pedagogiska fakulteten, Åbo Akademi.

Knutsdotter-Olofsson, B. (2003). In the world of play. (I lekens värld.). (2. ed.). Stockholm:Liber.

Marjanovic-Shane, A. (2010). From yes and no to me and you: A playful change in relationships and meanings. In M. C. Connery, V. P. John-Steiner, & A. Marjannovic-Shane, Vygotsky and creativity.A cultural-historical approach to play, meaning making and the arts. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Oddey, A. (1996). Devising theatre: a practical and theoretical handbook. London, United Kingdom: Routledge. 

White, D. & Le Cornu, A. (2011) Visitors and residents: A new typology for online engagement. Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, Volume 16, Number 9 – 5 September 2011
http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3171/3049 , accessed 03/22/21.

Whyte, D. (2021), online seminar Mythopoetic tour to Ireland.

Få nytt innehåll direkt till din inkorg.