Network Drawing: A Meta-Learning Tool?

Network Drawing: A Meta-Learning Tool?

Claire Scanlon & Paul Grivell - Northbrook College, Sussex

We never observe the source, nor the springing forth, but only what is outside the source, the source

becomes reality external to itself and always again without source or far from source.

Maurice Blanchot (1971)

Abstract

Springing forth…this paper outlines our creative enquiry into the drawing game Network Drawing,

considering its potential application as a meta-learning tool for group work. We offer a brief history of the

development and application of the game in our creative practice, teaching and beyond. We describe

our ethos and evolving research methodology, pointing speculatively to a web of relevant theory. We

then report on our workshop activity at conference and debate questions arising from the experience

and feedback gathered. Reflecting on this we consider the use and value of the term meta-learning and

contextualise the workshop experience and feedback in relation to the term. Lastly we offer an invitation

to those interested to play the game with others and to reflectively engage with the developing network

of participant researchers interested in this practice. This is very much a work-in-progress, and may it

remain so…

Key words: drawing, network, meta-learning

Origins

Network Drawing sprang out of a need to think visually in a complex, collaborative photo-editing task

that involved looking for connections between images. It seemed a good idea to record the process by

using a line to connect images, which then became ‘nodes’ in an unfolding network of lines.

Somehow, the collaborative drawing process and the compelling image of an unfolding network hi-

jacked our interest. This ‘discovery’ happened to coincide with the start of a collaborative art project

centring on ideas of growth. In establishing and co-ordinating a group of a dozen or more artist-

participants we began to use Network Drawing as an induction and warm-up activity at each meeting of

the group. An account of the process and an archive of the images generated in this phase are available

at: http://isthismybeginning.com/network_drawings.html.

Playing The Game

To both save space on our word count and to encourage interested readers to constructively engage

with Network Drawing beyond this article we offer a Prezi presentation link to explain how to play the

game. This link gives a succinct outline of the rules, whilst pointing to a number of practical issues you

may wish to consider if intending to play with others. It also gives a synopsis of much else in this paper.

http://prezi.com/-nxsjcmvgwgh/network-drawing-a-meta-learning-tool/

This open educational resource is public, free and re-usable under a Creative Commons Attribution-

NonCommercial-ShareAlike Licence.

Screenshot of Network Drawing Prezi

Methodology, Ethos & Scope

The boom in network research is part of a general shift, beginning in the second half of the twentieth

century, away from individualistic, essentialist and atomistic explanations towards more relational,

contextual and systemic understandings.

Borgatti and Foster (2003)

Networked Slime Mould - Dept of Plant Sciences, Oxford University

The network is the iconic signifier of our social, communication, organisational and security systems. As

a paradigm it exemplifies an epistemic shift in our world consciousness. As a model of practice the

network informs our work methodologically, in process and in outcome. Hence we conduct this research

(anti) project generatively and socially; it is co-researched, open-sourced and open-ended. If you’re

looking for an answer to our questioning title we have yet to find it…

So far we have referred to Network Drawing as a game, though in many respects this description is

misleading as the activity doesn’t conform to many of the normal conditions and expectations of

gameplay. There are no winners or losers, the rules are mutable and the activity of drawing could last

indefinitely. Depending on the context in which it is played it could be described equally as an exercise,

an ice-breaker, a meditation, occupational therapy or simply a past-time. It is a process with an

outcome, both of which may be reflected upon.

Since its inception as a graphic organiser and its subsequent development as a structuring event in

the context of an art project, we and others have played the game with many different interest groups.

We have also taken it on the road to the Drawing Research Network Conference 2012 - Drawing in

STEAM, where we explored it in collaboration with a programmer and played with participants from a

range of disciplinary backgrounds.

Network Drawing Workshop Outcomes - Drawing Research Network Conference, Wimbledon 2012

Along the way we have informally enlisted a growing constituency of participant researchers and

maintain communications with this group through social media in the form of an open facebook group.

see/join here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/186066274882991/

A number of our collaborators have reported back positively on drawings made in a range of contexts

including: Art School, Call Centre Training, Care Home residents with dementia, autistic children, down

the pub with friends, and at home with children on a wet Sunday afternoon.

As a result of these experiences we are struck by the potential for further research and development in

the following fields:

• the pedagogic - with students and staff across a broad range of subject areas

• the therapeutic - in care/social work with specific groups and dementia patients

• in creative practices - with artists, designers, crafts people and programmers

• in organisational/change management/staff development

As researchers we are interested in ‘the bricolage’ (Kincheloe & Berry 2009 Levi-Strauss 1962

Schwitters 1933) and Actor Network Theory1 (Callon, Latour, Law circa 1980), as research (art) forms

1 ANT is now subsumed under the much larger co-creation project AIME: An Inquiry into Modes of Existence. See here: http://www.modesofexistence.org/index.php/site/index

that approach the problem of complexity from differing points of entry. We aim to tease out and test their

relative methodological similarities viz ‘thick description’, and their differences in and of interpretation.

To this end we have positioned Network Drawing as our Point Of Entry Text or POET (Kincheloe and

Berry 2009) through which we are networking our literature review across a range of disciplinary and

interdisciplinary boundaries in order to situate our research practice in a broad (and ever expanding)

theoretical eco-system - though we hasten to add that we are curious visitors in many of these fields

and as such may have a curious take on some.

Thinking Through the Body

Embodiment in learning has been a key aspect of our previous research (Scanlon & Grivell 2012,

Scanlon & Grivell 2011) and it continues to be so in our hypothesis on Network Drawing.

In brief, we draw on developments in cognitive science and philosophies of consciousness such as

enactivist theory (Maturana & Varela 1998), which re-situate and embody cognition outside of the brain

and in the world (Alva Noë 2009). Noë explains how our body schemas are extended through the use of

tools and how we think and learn by doing. We connect this line of thinking to ideas of distributed

consciousness (Salomon 1997) and the canon of constructivist pedagogy (John Dewey, Carl Rogers

etc). The interdisciplinary formation of Somaesthetics (Shusterman 2012) has also come to inform our

thinking and doing in its pragmatic re-evaluation of the body’s importance in philosophies of self-

knowledge. Shusterman draws attention to a mind in the body culture in eastern philosophy, contrasting

it with the traditional western philososphical binary of mind and body.

Drawing is a physically active form of engagement with the world - it can engage the whole body,

especially if one is standing and moving around as is often the case when making a group Network

Drawing. Crucially in the playing of a Network Drawing game participants leave a trace of their action as

sign, describing the paths taken in the space of drawing and the encounters/intersections made with the

traces of other players in the unfolding structure.

Angela Rogers (2008) posits many of the underpinning arguments for drawing in a social context

relevant to our own study, arguing for,

…a reassessment of the relationship between drawing and identity, a move from reading drawing as

primarily individual acts of self-expression to a consideration of drawing as a social act of connection

and identification.

Rogers (2008)

Though we emphasise that there are no specialist skills involved in network drawing it is still relevant to

conceive of drawing as an expressive act of cognitive mapping. Petherbridge (2010) points to,

...the simple real world equation that linear drawing is a record of movement that implies movement, a

reciprocity that means that every drawing invites a spectator and an interpreter. In the sense that a line

is a conduit of meaning or ductus…The linear paths that the spectator/interpreter perceives or infers in

the drawing constitute cognitive mapping.

Petherbridge (2010)

Furthermore, she makes evident that in drawing,

…the contiguity between the action of drawing and the resulting trace as sign for that action is loaded

with as Barthes put it an energon, a labor which reveals - which makes legible - the trace of its pulsing

and expenditure.

Petherbridge (2010)

In the context of the network drawing game an individual's linear path maps not only their particular

journey through the increasingly complex network of lines, but also their willingness or ability to connect

with the unfolding structure. This observation points to both the opportunity for (self) reflection in the

context of meta-learning.

Meta-Learning - Mapping the Debate

In education the concept of meta-learning is primarily attributed to Maudsley (1979) who described it as,

…the cognitive process by which learners become aware of and increasingly in control of habits of

perception, inquiry, learning, and growth that they have internalized.

Maudsley (1979)

Thus it is premised on two key processes for learners; the development of self-knowledge of their

learning, and their movement to take control of that learning (Biggs 1985). This development of skill in

learning is distinct from conventional learning skills offered to support students.

However, assumptions about the capacity for meta-learning tools to diagnose and improve learning may

themselves be questioned.

…'good' learning is not necessarily synonymous with reflecting upon learning or having consciousness

of one's learning strategies. Correspondingly, poor learning strategies can be deeply embedded and

therefore difficult to manipulate....problematic learners do not necessarily improve their study strategies

just because they are alerted to these strategies and…in many cases, problematic learners lack the

very awareness of how to go about study in a more effective fashion.

Connolly & Ward (2010)

Given this paradox Connolly and Ward assert that meta-learning's utility is very much predicated on the

context of support that surrounds it: a position we endorse.

Nonetheless meta-learning is big business. Go google the term and you encounter a growing industry of

business consultants selling meta-learning solutions for team-building, for optimising efficiency and

maximising profit. These solutions queasily adopt western and eastern philosophies to persuade the

business and education communities of the value of training in meta-learning, or MLP (meta-learning

programmes). They include established tools such as the Reflections on Learning Inventory (RoLI),

Belbin® Team Roles Report, the VARK® Guide to Learning Styles, and the contentious positivity ratio

offered by Losada Line Consulting. Most rely on text-based questionnaires to determine their solutions.

Without entering into a sustained critique of these textual, question-based, test orientated meta-learning

tools one need only look at their websites to recognise that the visual and somatic are not significant

components of their methods, despite some recognition of the importance of these aspects in learning.

Further, the psychometric operationalism of most proprietary meta-learning tools results in quantitative

and prescriptive solutions that are highly contestable in their generalisations when applied to the unique,

specific circumstances and histories of real, individual learners and their subjects of study. These

prescriptions are derived from pre-programmed algorithms applied to responses to a sequence of

closed text-based questions that tie a range of respondent’s habits and behaviours to their learning

propensities. Whilst some proponents recognise this as a problem in their accounts of how to interpret

and apply the results of inventories or ‘tests’, they still offer up a seemingly conclusive, statistically

based account of the individual learner/respondent’s propensities in their approach to learning.

Beyond the specific problematics of operationalism, when meta-learning theory is reviewed in the light

of cognitive science, we encounter human beings’ biological and cultural pre-disposition to avoid self-

awareness.

This special situation of knowing how we know is traditionally elusive for our Western culture, We are

keyed to action and not to reflection, so that our personal life is generally blind to itself. It is as though a

taboo tells us: “it is forbidden to know about knowing”

Maturana and Varela (1987)

Using the example of the blind spot in visual perception Maturana and Varela remind us that under

normal circumstances we do not see that we do not see in that part of our visual field, and that it takes a

simple optical test to make present this discontinuity in our perception of the world.

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_spot_(vision)

It may be that we need meta-learning tools to enable us to recognise our blind spots in learning, but we

suggest that such tools need to be enactive, given our understanding that learning is not simply taking

place in the learner but in their co-existence with others and the environment, which of course includes

the meta-learning tool itself.

Reflections In & On Network Drawing

As a visual and somatic practice Network Drawing offers multiple dimensions for reflection in and on the

game: from becoming aware of one’s levels of emotional and physical comfort or discomfort in the

process of drawing with others, to noting one’s attitude to the ‘rules’, to drawing per se, and the pace,

range and quality of line drawn. All of these attributes can speak volumes to those able to access them.

However, it is also evident that tacit feelings and knowledge (Polyani 1967) can be made more available

to consciousness if they are brought into language and shared with others (Rogers 2008).

In speculating about Network Drawing as a meta-learning opportunity we have used video recording to

produce a supervisory perspective, enabling participants to step-back from the action and see

themselves as other, in a kind of action re-play.

Screenshot of facebook page with video of network drawing activity and comments from participants

This critical distance is also achieved by simply moving the drawing from the horizontal plane of action

to a vertical plane of reflection, where the face to face perspective pre-disposes us to interrogate and

reflect.

Making a drawing (in the horizontal plane) - Network Drawing Workshop, University of Brighton Learning &

Teaching Conference 2013

This shift allows a move from the self-centred action of the micro, to a consideration of the macro bigger

picture. Participant response at this stage is often characterised by an appreciation of the aesthetic

appearance of the drawing, its spatial qualities for instance and even a sense of pride in its production.

Colour & B/W Network Drawing Outcomes (in vertical plane) - Network Drawing Workshop

University of Brighton Learning & Teaching Conference 2013

In structuring the University of Brighton Learning and Teaching Conference Network Drawing Workshop

we conducted two simultaneous games, offering one group a choice of coloured pens (so individual

paths could be identified), and the other using black pens only. We also videoed one game from

overhead, intending to play back and discuss the process, though time didn’t permit this on the day.

Lo-fi version viewable here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/186066274882991/ -

!/photo.php?v=10152855508635171&set=o.186066274882991&type=2&theater

To address the specific question of whether Network Drawing may facilitate meta-leaning in group work

we also introduced a spatialised key word prompt sheet as an aid for the reflection process, with the

possibility for participants to connect, cross out or add in words, and make additional comments.

Completed prompt-words ‘map’ reflection/evaluation form

Our prompt words were: constraints reach judgment dynamic variation anxiety calming compelling

attitude engagement focus awareness pace exciting pleasure flow limited others irritating ease rhythm

fluidity range decisiveness interaction analytic frustrating relaxing useful mindfulness conviviality

suggestive self

Words added in by participants were: addictive thought-provoking beautiful silly tedious balanced

bollocks embarrassing ownership pressure conform compulsive choice play game overthrow chase

rules agitation aggression difference sameness challenge display hide ego therapeutic liberating

meditative nodal-relationships scratchy

Given the HE academic context for this workshop our participants were all likely to be highly successful

learners, so we anticipated a level of informed critical response. What surprised us was the degree of

polarization and strength of feeling in those responses.

One participant in the B&W drawing remarked afterwards that as one’s line became submerged with

others it made it possible for people to act more independently or disruptively than in the colour drawing,

suggesting that where individuals’ lines were subsumed in the overall picture it was easier to get away

with non-compliance and disruption. Alternatively it may also indicate a need to assert individuality and

difference, whereas when individuality is preserved in co-operation there is less need to assert

difference. Thus network drawing can reveal attitudes to co-operation.

One particular area of interest is in participants’ interpretation and/or response to the rules and

expectations of the game. The range of deviation from the rules varies depending on the cause, with

any confusion about the rules at the start of the game generally becoming clarified through observation

of the action. But at its most extreme the individual asserts their non-conformism by disregarding both

the concept and the image of a network in order to display their own path. We have seen this behaviour

most often when drawing with other artists whose need to assert individuality can be pressing.

In his interdisciplinary study On Creativity David Bohm (2004) suggests that our normalised mentality is

that of a self-sustaining confusion,

…when the mind is trying to escape the awareness of conflict...in which one's deepest intention is really

to avoid perceiving the fact, rather than sort it out or make it clear.

Bohm (2004)

One participant’s feedback helped us understand that although many remarked on similarities with

physical ice-breaker type games such as twister, the group momentum or directional flow around the

drawing space left her feeling rather isolated as she was swept along, rather than enabling her, as

others were, to find opportunities for sociability. Whether this observation was useful to her in bringing to

mind the tension between co-operation and compliance, it certainly made us aware of the potential for

negative affect in the activity.

Participants wrote that they found the game calming, meditative, pleasurable, addictive, compelling,

liberating, exciting, thought-provoking and engaging. Others also found the activity irritating for a variety

of reasons - one person attributed their irritation to the crowding effect on the overall attractiveness of

the drawing, another to the scratchy sound of the pens and yet another to the compliance with the rules

of the structure. One participant even expressed outraged skepticism, declaring the activity to be

bollocks.

Indeed the paradox of the feedback is how to separate the participants’ critique of the game from their

experience of it, and whether they can see their experience as deriving as much from their prior

conditioning, assumptions and theories as from the activity on offer. This is a crucial question for

participants to consider if the meta-learning opportunity is to be taken-up.

Certainly there may be a very real danger in interpreting others’ actions in this activity. Whatever self-

diagnosis or self-knowledge an individual might come to through the game is for them to determine.

Hence the work to be undertaken in learning from the experience needs to be done by participants

rather than done to them.

Very drawn to the idea that no-one but me will diagnose how I played. Can see the boxes but great that

I don’t have to tick them.

From Participant Feedback Sheet

We also speculate that what Network Drawing gains though its inclusive base-level skill requirement

may be lost if it then fails to sustain interest or remain challenging enough to enable a group to achieve

flow. Csíkszentmihályi (1975) argues that the experience of flow is best attained in activities requiring

high levels of skill and challenge, yet Network Drawing requires no high level skills in drawing. However,

experience of the playing in the game suggests that something akin to Csíkszentmihályi’s account of

flow is readily attained, and participants often refer to their absorbtion in the task and the growing

complexity of that engagement as the networked structure grows.

In comparison to established models Network Drawing uses the visual and the kinesthetic as primary

means to engage participants. Verbal and written reflection may also be elicited, but we are resistant to

an approach that prescriptively diagnoses symptoms and extrapolates solutions from this process of

engagement and reflection.

Therefore, whilst we acknowledge the need to bring the experience of Network Drawing into language

through contextual guidance and supported reflection, we would eschew its use for categorical

diagnosis. Instead we propose that whatever insight becomes available to the participant is for

themselves to recognise and work with.

If Network Drawing facilitates the development of meta-learning capacity at all, it is as an opportunity,

rather than as a solution. Meantime we continue to play, explore and reflect on this practice and offer up

this opportunity to others. Should you wish to play do let us know how it goes…

Biographies

Claire Scanlon and Paul Grivell work together on photography, media and art programmes at

Northbrook College, Sussex. They also collaborate as artists, researchers and writers.

Bibliography:

Biggs J (1985) ‘The role of meta-learning in study processes’, British Journal of Educational

Psychology, Vol. 55, No. 2

Blanchot M (1997) Friendship, Stanford, Stanford University Press

Bohm D (1996) On Creativity, Oxon, Routledge

Borgatti S & Foster P (2003) ‘The Network Paradigm in Organisational Research: A Review &

Typology’, Journal of Management 2003, 29(6) 991-1013

Connolly R & Ward S (2010) Enacting Metalearning: Using Performance Based Research in

conjunction with Meyer's Reflections on Learning Inventory to raise HND/FD students’

awareness of the self as learner in the context of level six (final year) undergraduate study,

HEA Palatine Development Award Report

Csikszentmihalyi M (1975) Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: Experiencing Flow in Work and

Play, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass

Jackson N (2004) ‘Developing the concept of metalearning’, Innovations in Education and

Teaching International, 41:4, 391-403

Kincheloe J L & Berry K S (2004) Rigour and Complexity in Educational Research;

Conceptualising the Bricolage. Maidenhead, Open University Press

Latour B (2005) Reassembling the Social - An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory,

Oxford, Open University Press

Maturana H & Varela F (1987) The Tree of Knowledge: the biological roots of human

understanding. Boston, Shambhala Publications

Meyer, JHF (2000) An Overview of the Development & Application of the Reflections on

Learning Inventory (RoLI), Presentation at the 1st RoLI Symposium, Imperial College, London

Noe A (2009) Out of Our Heads: Why you are not your Brain and other lessons from the

Biology of Consciousness, New York, Hill and Wang

Petherbridge D (2010) The Primacy of Drawing. New Haven, Yale University Press

Polanyi M (1967) The Tacit Dimension, New York, Anchor Books

Rogers A (2008) Drawing Encounters: A practice-led investigation into collaborative drawing

as a means of revealing tacit elements of one-to-one social encounter, PhD thesis, UAL

Rogers A (2010) ’Drawing the spaces between us: Using drawing encounters to explore social

interaction’ in Martin P (ed) (2010) Making Space for Creativity, Brighton, University of

Brighton Press http://www.brighton.ac.uk/creativity/ 33-39

Saloman G (1997) Distributed Cognitions: Psychological & Educational Considerations,

Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Scanlon C & Grivell P (2011) ‘Workbook Framelock: a transitional survey and critical analysis

of student approaches to creative process documentation in photography, visual art and media

education’, Partnerships: Articles from the Learning & Teaching Conference 2010, Brighton,

University of Brighton Press

http://www.brighton.ac.uk/snm/mentorship/RippleEffectPartnerships.pdf

Scanlon C & Grivell P (2012) ‘Autographic Photographic: developing critical analysis through

slow doing and embodied thinking’, Networks Magazine, Brighton, ADM-HEA,

http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/projects/networks/issue-16-january-2012/autographic-photographic-

developing-critical-analysis-through-slow-doing-and-embodied-thinking

Shusterman R. (2012) Thinking Through the body - Essays in Somaesthetics. Cambridge,

Cambridge University Press

Waugh C & Fredrickson B (2006) ‘Nice to know you: Positive emotions, self–other overlap,

and complex understanding in the formation of a new relationship’, Journal of Positive

Psychology Vol 1 Issue 2

Winters T (2011) ‘Facilitating Meta-learning in Art & Design Education’, iJADE 30.1