From Turtles to Tweets
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•874 views
This document summarizes research on building and sustaining communities of educational leadership through values and ethics. It discusses how survey results from a small university found high levels of cohort effectiveness and altruism among educational leadership students. The document then reviews theories from evolutionary biology on how altruism can evolve, including ideas around group selection and cooperation. It discusses signaling behavior and reputation management in both natural groups and digital communities. In concluding, it poses questions about how reputation is modeled online, replicating conditions for effective cohorts, the role of theory of mind, and whether digital signals are more important than the qualities they represent.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
Similar to From Turtles to Tweets
Similar to From Turtles to Tweets (20)
More from Sara Stetson
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
From Turtles to Tweets
- 2. Building and Sustaining Communities of Educational Leadership Values and Ethics for Educational Advancement and Sustainability Jill Hartmann Dr. Sara Stetson Dr. Ann Gaffney Building and Sustaining Communities of Educational Leadership
- 5. Survey
- 8. “They have taught me that it is possible to find a group of people who don’t have to trample on others to be successful.” Cohort Effectiveness
- 9. Cohort Effectiveness Scale 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 2008 2010 2011 2012 Cohort Effectiveness by Length of Afiliation
- 11. Altruism “People have gone WAY out of their way to help me with things I needed. People helped me with materials and HOURS of work without expecting anything in return. It is just completely overwhelming!” Altruism
- 12. Competitive?
- 13. Competition “I do not want to be behind while others continue to make progress. I want to be viewed as a capable/competent member of the team. The cohort makes me work hard to continue the process toward the dissertation.” “I may not have finished without the help and encouragement (and the competitiveness)” “We hold one another accountable for our actions, which compels a greater depth to research and conceptualization.” Competition
- 14. Collaborative?
- 15. “My cohort started helping each other practice for defenses. Everyone was so eager to help and it made me feel great to think I might be part of helping, too.” Collaboration
- 17. One of Darwin's biggest challenges was explaining the coexistence of altruism and evolution.
- 20. Game Theory
- 24. Reinforce
- 25. “A tribe including many members who, from possessing in high degree the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy, were always ready to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes, and this would be natural selection.” -Darwin Group Selection
- 27. Public Goods vs. Common Goods Costly to provide but all group members benefit
- 29. Helping others increases the likelihood that they will help us in the future
- 30. More competitive helping in larger groups, and then altruism stabilizes (Barclay, 2011)
- 31. Competing over who gets to pair with whom Abilities + Willingness + Availability Social capital triggers partner choice
- 32. Thinking about you thinking about me
- 33. (Nettle, Nott, & Bateson, 2012)
- 34. (Alden-Smith & Bliege Bird, 2000; Bliege Bird & Smith, 2005) Turtle Hunting
- 45. Questions: • How are mechanisms underlying reputation modeled in large communities? (Social media?) • Can an understanding of the dynamics of cooperation in groups help us to replicate conditions that give rise to effective cohorts? • To what extent does reputation management depend on Theory of Mind/mentalizing? (Tennie et al., 2010) • Can TOM/mentalizing develop to the same capacity in a digital world? • What is the salience of reputation? Have signals become more important than the qualities they represent? (Tennie et al., 2010)
- 46. Thank You Dr. Sara Stetson Jill Hartmann
Editor's Notes
- Literature is mixed: “pros and cons” Cohorts are effective or “highly dysfunctional” Literature on program components is available Literature on characteristics of an effective professional learning community is available Very little information on why and how professional learning communities develop Very little information about the group dynamics/characteristics that are foundational to effective cohorts
- “We are going to swim all together like the biggest fish in the sea!” He taught them to swim close together, each in his own place …And when they had learned to swim together like one giant fish he said, “I’ll be the eye”. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to collect data on group dynamics. Data collection included a multi-part survey. The survey consisted of a very brief demographic section followed by four banks of questions. The first series of questions targeted the positive and negative aspects of cohorts as outlined in the literature review. The second series was an adapted version of the Self Report Altruism Scale (Witt & Boleman, 2009), and the third series was an adapted version of the Conflict Management Styles scale (Adkins, 2006). All three sets of questions were presented in a Likert-like format. The final set of questions were open ended. These questions probed for positive and negative cohort experiences as well as participant reflections on what experiences or student characteristics promote or detract from positive cohort development. 109 Surveys, 42% response rate.
- Helped academically Helped build leadership skills, negotiation skills, communication skills Opportunities for leadership roles
- One of Darwin's biggest challenges was explaining the coexistence of altruism and evolution. If selection was really on an individual level, then altruism would not make sense. Universal selection contradicts the mathematics of game theory and is not often found in nature.
- There are a number of elements that come into play in group situations that may serve to initiate and/or maintain cooperative behavior. Theory of mind: How we attribute goal directedness and intention in other people. The part of the brain that is involved in executing actions (motor cortex) is also involved in understanding or firing when perceiving someone else’s actions. There is a stronger understanding of others actions when you know how to do the actions yourself. Mirror neurons—involved in anticipating other people’s actions, and is highly dependent on experience.
- How are the motor/mirror system and the emotional system connected together? Mirror neurons are activated when we look at other peoples expressions and when we imitate those expressions. The system can also send messages regarding emotion to our brains and this is what allows us to feel empathy. Imitation and empathy are linked. Altruism is most likely to come into play when we experience empathy for the person in need We are able to experience events and emotions the way that person experiences them. (Batson, et al., 1997, 2010; Toi & Batson, 1982; Iacobini, 2011}
- Social behavior that is reinforced is more likely to be maintained. The level of public recognition in a group may be a factor in reinforcement of cooperative behavior. Conversely, the level of public failure in a group may serve to maintain empathy.
- (a) the between group selection pressures are stronger than the within group selection pressures (i.e., intergroup competition overrides intragroup competition) (b) groups frequently disband and individuals have the opportunity to choose with whom they interact, and (c) ingroup and outgroup members can be easily distinguished – these conditions are likely to uphold for humans (D. S. Wilson, 2002).
- Generous individuals have increased access to relationships and increased trust within the group. Similar to competition for grooming in primates.
- -People who show generosity in cooperative tasks are given higher status within the group than less-generous contributors (Hardy & Van Vugt, 2006) -People are more likely to help with a flat tire or donate to the Salvation Army if they see someone helping/donating beforehand (Bryan & Test, 1967) -People who see a poster of eyes are more likely to contribute to an honor system (Bateson, Nettle, & Roberts, 2006) -People who see a poster of eyes are less likely to litter in a cafeteria (Ernest-Jones, Nettle, & Bateson, 2011) -Public vs. anonymous donations (Chell, in press; Milinski, et al., 2006) -The presence of a camera will mediate whether people interfere with a theft (Bommel, et al., 2013) -Delgado and colleagues (2005) found that participants would make more risky investment choices with partners when they had been told that the partners had a good reputation.
- Wiki spaces (Wagner & Prasarnphanich, 2007) Discussion boards Virtual classrooms Gossip (Feinberg, et al, 2014;Sommerfeld, et al., 2008) Public Observation (Lacerta & Macis, 2010) Social media