Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Futures methods for education research

634 views

Published on

A talk I gave at the third seminar in the ESRC-sponsored series Educational Futures (http://edfutures.futurelab.org.uk/)

  • Loved your talk onn the day.... would have liked to discuss more around it.... have sent a 'perturbation' to the website for the day and am in contact with Mike Sharples about ACTION to follow this up... am concerned that there was a lot of describing the problem....and not really getting to strategies.... (see my slideshare PP on 'Leading and Learning for Independence' John Pearce
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Futures methods for education research

  1. 1. Methods for Educational Futures Research<br />5.7.02010<br />Richard Sandford<br />LSRI, Nottingham UK<br />
  2. 2. Outline<br />Why methods?<br />Summary of common techniques<br />Alternative methodological frameworks<br />Educational research perspective<br />Perrotta, Hague & Williamson (2010) “Maintaining Futures Expertise”<br />http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/project_reports/Maintaining_Futures_Expertise_Report.pdf<br />
  3. 3. Backcastingenvironment scanningforecasting scenariostrend analysiscausal layered analysismetascanningcross-impact matricestime capsulesfutures wheeltime linesMICMACmorphological analysishorizon scanningfutures triangleweak signalssystems dynamicscausal loop diagramsDELPHIvisualisation7 questions5th scenarioeconometricswargamingmodelling<br />
  4. 4. Why methods?<br />Enable confidence in claims about future states<br />Enable comparisons within futures work & establish common professional standards<br />Transparency, legitimacy, trust<br />
  5. 5. Why not methods?<br />“Tool trap” (Graham Leicester, IFF)<br />Using futures techniques to avoid hard questions<br />“People want the tool, not the struggle” (BCH/MFE)<br />Can be misapplied<br />Spurious credibility& legitimacy<br />FS fundamentally interdisciplinary – no one set of ‘approved’ methods<br />
  6. 6. Futures as a process<br />Futures work not a single event<br />Different techniques appropriate at different stages<br />Ideally a continuous cycle<br />Often limited by real-world constraints<br />
  7. 7. Foresight UK<br />http://www.foresight.gov.uk/microsites/hsctoolkit/<br />
  8. 8. Foresight UK<br />
  9. 9. RAHS (Singapore)<br />
  10. 10. Hines & Bishop (2007)<br />Framing<br />Scanning<br />Forecasting<br />Visioning<br />Planning<br />Acting<br />
  11. 11. Top-level process<br />General framework<br />Not definitive – enabling loose groupings of different methods to support today’s discussion<br />Looking at different ways of organising methods later on<br />
  12. 12. Top-level process<br />Finding a question<br />Learning about the world<br />Describing the present world<br />Constructing futures<br />Responding to futures narratives<br />
  13. 13. Finding a question<br />Stakeholder analysis<br />Issue analysis<br />Futures wheel<br />
  14. 14. Learning about the world<br />Weak signals<br />Horizon scanning <br />Shaping Tomorrow, Sigma scan<br />Trend extrapolation<br />Gathering opinions + beliefs about possible futures<br />DELPHI, 7 questions<br />‘crowdsourcing’, sentiment analysis<br />
  15. 15. Describing the present world<br />Systems dynamics<br />Causal loop diagrams<br />Morphological analysis<br />Driver analysis<br />Modelling<br />Gaming<br />
  16. 16. Causal loop diagrams<br />http://blog.iseesystems.com/stella-ithink/limits-to-growth/<br />
  17. 17. Causal loop diagrams<br />http://www.foresight.gov.uk/OurWork/ActiveProjects/Obesity/Obesity.asp<br />
  18. 18. Morphological analysis<br />
  19. 19. Constructing futures<br />Scenarios<br />Multiple methods: different purposes<br />Instances of outputs from models<br />2 x 2 grid<br />Causal layered analysis<br />Timelines<br />Connecting present to future<br />
  20. 20. Responding to futures narratives<br />5th scenario<br />Backcasting<br />Visioning<br />Windtunnelling<br />Roadmaps<br />
  21. 21. The unexpected<br />“Black swans” (Taleb) <br />unpredictability of high-impact events<br />“Dragon kings” (Sornette) <br />statistical outliers indicative of major system change<br />Discontinuties, wild cards, shocks<br />“unknown unknowns”<br />Tipping points, phase transitions <br />“social analogues” (Sornette)<br />
  22. 22. The unexpected<br />Hard to reflect in scenario-based approaches<br />Not detectable through trend extrapolation<br />Emergent products of complexity<br />Unlikely? Or unpalatable?<br />
  23. 23. Sorting methodological approaches<br />
  24. 24. Who’s doing it?<br />Governments & agencies<br />STEEP/STEM, persuasion<br />Private companies<br />Technologists, planners, designers<br />Activists<br />Academics<br />
  25. 25. How long does it take?<br />3 years? 3 hours?<br />Different methods require lengths of time<br />Engagement time & preparation time different<br />Dependencies on other methods & research<br />Supports an open-ended and continuous process?<br />Or moves towards a final destination?<br />
  26. 26. FS traditions<br />Empirical/analytic<br />“data-driven, positivistic, often corporate”/RAND<br />Critical/comparative<br />Perhaps closest to education research?<br />Activist/participatory<br />Links with women’s, peace & environmental groups<br />Multicultural/global<br />(Slaughter, Futures Beyond Dystopia ch. 3)<br />
  27. 27. 6 concepts 6 pillars<br />Used futures<br />Disowned futures<br />Alternative futures<br />Alignment<br />Models of social change<br />Uses of the future<br />Inayatullah (2008)<br />Mapping<br />Anticipation<br />Timing<br />Deepening<br />Creating alternatives<br />Transforming<br />
  28. 28. Other categorisations<br />Masini (1999)<br />Descriptive<br />Normative<br />Objective<br />Subjective<br />Systemic<br />Slaughter (1999)<br />Input methods<br />Analytic methods<br />Paradigmatic methods<br />Iterative & exploratory methods<br />Gordon (1992)<br />Exploratory<br />Normative<br />
  29. 29. Activities that...<br />Address facts about the world<br />Empirical, data-based<br />Address beliefs about the world<br />Social sci techniques<br />Encourage conversation and dialogue<br />Workshop approaches<br />Describe relations between things<br />Systems thinking<br />Speak to the heart & imagination<br />Time capsules, visualisation<br />Value human existence & experience<br />Ethnographic & participatory<br />
  30. 30. Education research & futures<br />Already encountered, and addressed, many epistemic and methodological difficulties FS beginning to recognise<br />Already able to differentiate appropriate & valid methods – same criteria as other academic domains<br />
  31. 31. No best answers<br />Multiple perspectives and traditions within FS and broader futures work<br />Multiple perspectives and traditions within education research as well<br />Not appropriate to prescribe some methods over others<br />So how to choose for a particular project?<br />
  32. 32. Matching scope<br />What’s the unit of analysis?<br />Nation state, organisation, individual?<br />Where does the influence of a technique or methodological perspective start and finish?<br />End with policymakers? Only concerned with canvassing beliefs?<br />What tasks is it designed to accomplish?<br />Generating or communicating futures?<br />
  33. 33. Matching worldviews<br />How does a particular technique assume change happens in the world?<br />What models of cause and effect are in play?<br />‘trends’ colliding & interacting sits uneasily with some social science perspectives<br />‘levers of change’ can seem simplistic<br />Who are the actors in the futures generated?<br />
  34. 34. Matching values<br />How does a particular technique talk about people?<br />Is it concerned with meeting the same ends? Does it help education meet ethical responsibility to promote action?<br />Does it give any role to the people affected by the futures it contributes to?<br />
  35. 35. Possible challenges<br />Links between FS and education research clear<br />Hard to sign up to the sort of social interventions FS can ask for<br />Perceived danger of sounding naive<br />Education research practice situated within the contexts that FS aims to challenge<br />
  36. 36. Other fields<br />Many other academic & professional disciplines with a temporal orientation<br />Many other domains concerned with changing behaviour<br />FS & education research both used to looking to other disciplines<br />Geography, architecture, design, medicine...<br />
  37. 37. Psychiatry<br />Increasing attention given to mental health challenges raised by negative futures <br />living in them and thinking about them<br />“Solastalgia” – Glenn Albrecht<br />Homesickness while in a (changed) home<br />Notions of ‘resilience’ more prominent<br />“Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems: The Role of Learning and Education” Krasnyet al. (Dec 10)<br />C4 Education ‘Super Me’<br />
  38. 38. Religion<br />Existing cultural languages of deep time and consequence<br />Useful as provocation or alternative view in supporting futures conversation<br />Reaffirming (e.g. Inayatullah)’s insistence on recognising global diversity of worldviews<br />
  39. 39. Fundamental question<br />Does your chosen approach reaffirm the status quo? <br />Or does it lead to questions you find uncomfortable?<br />
  40. 40. Thank you<br />richard.sandford@futurelab.org.uk<br />

×