hipelago of Possibilities
‘ool for reflection, discussion
_ and discovery of what teachers
_ hold dear

Figure 3. The Archipelago of Possibilities guide for facilitators.

A simple show of hands could have communicated what aspects
teachers’ hold dear, yet this quick move would fail to lead anyone
to invest in substantive change.

This expanded notion of making does not diminish the value
of crafting things so much as ask us to be mindful of what we are
making—to consider how we make space for collaborating, make
space for new thinking, make space for future action. The scale
and complexity of the social problems we face can lead disciplines
down a path of intractable analysis and potential paralysis. Otto
Scharmer presents mindful action as the counter to an action-less
mind [9]. Critical making is a key affordance of design, it defines
our humble capacity to make a move, to propose, to enact, to pro-
voke. In our quest for sustainable change let us be mindful that
beyond the apps, trackers and data-visualization there are mind-
sets to be transformed and design has a role to play in helping to
make that happen.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge my collaborators: Mai Kobori for the
Riverdale Country School project and Yi Zhang for the B’twixt
Record of Learning. The student team behind the design of the
Archipelago of Possibilities are: Isabella Brandalise, Ricardo
Dutra, Sophie Riendeau, and Ker Thao. The projects would not
have been possible without generous support by the project
partners: Riverdale Country School, the d.school at Stanford
University and Melbourne School of Graduate Education at the
University of Melbourne.

Figure 4. Teachers craft a “souvenir” during the workshop.

REFERENCES

fi] Aronson, Joshua. Fried, Catherine and Good, Carrie. Reducing the effects of stereo-
type threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 38, 113-125. 2002. [2] Dunne, Anthony and
Raby, Fiona. Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction and Social Dreaming. MIT Press,
2013. [3] Dweck, Carol. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. ist ed. Ballantine
Books, 2006. [4] Gottschall, Jonathan. Storytelling Animal: How Stories Make Us

Human. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2012. [5] Grocott, Lisa and Kobori, Mai.

(2015). The affordances of designing for the learning sciences. In Proceedings of the
3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, 3:1180-95. Chicago,
uSA: Aalto University, Finland. doi:10.13140/RG.2.1.2904.6880. [6] Hattie, John. Visible
Learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning. New York: Routledge, 2012.

[7] Kegan, Robert. Lahey, Lisa Laskow. Immunity to Change: How to Overcome It and
Unlock the Potential in Yourself and Your Organization. Boston: Harvard Business
School Publishing, 2009. [8] Prochaska, J., Norcross, J. and DiClemente, C. Changing
for good: the revolutionary program that explains the six stages of change and teaches
you how to free yourself from bad habits. New York: William Morrow Reprint, 2007.
[9] Scharmer, 0. Presencing toolkit: Prototyping PDF. 2009. https://www.presencing.
com/sites/default/files/tools/P1_Tool_Prototyping.pdf [10] Schon, D. The Reflective
Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books, 1983. [11]
Tonkinwise, C. Prototyping risks when design is disappearing. Current Issue 06:
Designing Wisdom. Vancouver: Emily Carr University of Art and Design, 2015. [12]
Wrzesniewski, A. et. al. Multiple types of motives don’t multiply the motivation of
west point cadets. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2014.

SOCIABILITY & COMMUNITY