The Collaborative Dining Table
- Choose one of the projects you identified (successful or otherwise) and draw or indicate a place setting for each person involved at the table. Describe each person you worked with. Consider the following questions:
- Were they part of or outside of your discipline?
- Co-Investigators 1 and 2 were both instructors in a Language Studies department. They were both language teachers (English and French) and had expertise in pedagogical theories and SoTL. However, co-investigator 1 had expertise in educational technology, while co-investigator 2 was involved in education administration.
- Our research assistant was an undergraduate student who helped with data collection and processing. She also helped to edit our research publications and presenting the research.
- How did your skills compare with theirs?
- I had experience in experimental design and statistical data analysis in phonetics and phonology. Research in these fields is more quantitative. At the same time, my co-investigator had more experience in doing SoTL research and qualitative analysis. She also had a lot more experience working with and training undergraduate students in research methods and dissemination.
- Do they offer a diverse perspective that is different from yours? If so, how does this help improve your teaching?
- Yes, my co-investigator offered many insights into using surveys to collect, process and interpret qualitative data. She also taught me how to design experiential-learning courses to train our research assistant.
- Were they part of or outside of your discipline?
- At the centre of the table list the modes and communication tools you used to collaborate. Note which ones worked better than others.
- We created a OneNote folder to keep all our documents. This tool allowed us to work on the documents independently and collaboratively while keeping track of the changes. It also allowed us to share research papers and annotate them as we read them.
- We used Zoom to run real-time discussions. The screen sharing function was excellent for editing documents and PowerPoint presentations as a group. We had the option to meet on MS Teams but found the screen sharing function to be glitchy when this platform was first launched.
- Identify patterns and gaps:
- Highlight the type of people and processes that you know work well for you and which ones do not.
- We carved out half-day meetings and worked on editing papers together. I found this to be much more efficient than working individually on separate versions and then trying to reconcile the different versions.
- There were times when we disagreed. We just needed to keep our eyes on the target and not take things personally.
- Identify anything that is missing from the table—anything you need to consider for future collaborations.
- The only thing I can think of is perhaps the background, representing the social context in which the collaboration is situated. For the collaborative project I describe here, the background would have represented my research participants and my intended audience for dissemination.
- Highlight the type of people and processes that you know work well for you and which ones do not.
Example for "The Collaborative Dining Table":
https://twitter.com/kr8bb8s9g7/status/1446200110677905410/photo/1
Leave a Reply