2.2 Shared Experiences, Content, Rituals

2.2 - Shared Experiences

Shared Experiences

“From the perspective of a member, the shared experiences are what makes up the core of the community. These experiences lead to more interactions which lead to more trust among the members.”

-Community Canvas Framework

“The main question in a community is how will we be - when we are together?”

-Peter Block, Community: The Structure of Belonging

Shared experiences make up the "associational life" that binds people together as a community. In a community, experiences can be "top-down" - designed and initiated by its management - or "bottom-up", designed by its members. In creating shared experiences for members, we must return to our discussion on tools and their best usage in an online course. The events of the past year brought a style of synchronous videoconferencing-based education more into focus. Leveraging these synchronous interactions where possible is vital for students to have experiences of belonging. After we have optimized the existing offerings in light of our community goals, members, and values, the organization must also take an encouraging stance towards member-organized forms of the community since they are perhaps the most authentic expression of communal growth and success. Although asynchronous forms of communication and discussion are also "experiences," they may fit better in our discussion on "content" in the coming session because of the written and recorded form of the activity. Therefore, the choice here focuses predominantly on synchronous modalities, some meaningful interactions on the Slack platform notwithstanding.

Synchronous

Students in the 2020 course tended to rate events with a synchronous or meaningful interactive component - such as the TF community hours, Module 6 Peer Review Project, and guest lecture sessions - as "very valuable for the community." However, we must recognize the differences between students and the variability between TF groups, affinity groups, and events. Some experiences may be more relevant, formative, exciting, or challenging to certain members, while others may represent an exciting opportunity for almost all members. Some events, such as peer review, are more significant because they highlight a change in roles - becoming a community mentor, increasing trust and responsibility. However, students prefer synchronous, meaningful, or intimate interaction over asynchronous or less meaningful interaction to forge community.

Major (2015) offers the following six principles of connected contact:

• Frequency. The more people interact, the more likely they are to become close and establish intimacy.

• Quality of interaction. The more positive the experience and the relationships, the greater the bond.

• Closure to events. The more definite the tasks and the clearer the closure, the greater the connections groups will share. If an interaction is ambiguous and tasks are left unresolved, cohesiveness will be inhibited.

• Shared event. The more important the shared event (e.g., a crisis) is to those involved, the greater the community bond. •

• Investment. The more important the community’s history and current status is to the members, the greater the connection (e.g., emotional or financial investment leads to more involvement).

• Honor and humiliation. Reward or humiliation in the presence of a community has a significant impact on the attractiveness (or adverseness) of that community to the person involved.

• Spiritual bond /community spirit. Positive feelings toward the group.

We should also mention that Peter Block calls the small group "the unit of transformation". (Block, 2018) In small groups, there is a place for each individual's uniqueness to be valued and where it does not have to be surrendered for the sake of belonging in the larger group. It is also where all the preceding principles are in a perfect balance: an optimally small group can meet frequently, have quality interactions, form positive feelings, and take risks with one another as they do not have to worry about being humiliated in front of the larger group. This small group rule is why HPL should support the formation of affinity groups, study pods and pairs, and other community-initiated groups - because the community is composed of smaller but sturdier connections such as these.

Another theme with real relevance to any discussions of shared experiences, content, and rituals is consistency. A consistent rhythm makes shared experiences more effective by signaling that the community is a consistent and sustainable place to invest. The absence of repeatability is sometimes just as noticeable as the presence of it. An example of a consistent rhythmic event in HPL would be the weekly guest speaker events and informational events. During the first two weeks of HPL 2021, there will be an introductory social hour to cohorts delivered by the TFs. In the 2020 course, students mentioned that they had quite varied experiences in TF groups.

As we can see here, having multiple ways of demonstrating mastery and engaging in community is essential not just for different students' strengths but also for different students' situations.

Top-down vs bottom-up

There is a tension between organizing shared experiences in a “top-down” way, from community management down, versus a “bottom-up” way, by its members. The CCF identifies this to be an issue both of 1. Scale and logistics and b. As an “important part of signaling to what extent running the community is a shared responsibility.” This issue is also an essential element to indicate to students.

For instance, as the Community Canvas Project observes, “if everything is provided from the top, members will get used to the fact that everything is served to them and expect that going forward.” How does this interact with the issue of scale? What is needed, moving forward, is to experiment with a balance of top-down and bottom-up. For instance, students might be motivated and inspired to organize events and shared experiences and feel supported in doing so. Having an array of formats in which the community can be experienced speaks to demonstrating mastery in multiple ways and student agency. In terms of “taking ownership,” instructors may need to do more to communicate that the ball is, ultimately, in the students’ court. In terms of the value of agency and equality of this proposition, students may need more say in how particular activities look before they can fully commit.

Diversity of Membership

How do we develop a community that supports the voices of introverted or minority members? “Many communities tend to design more heavily for extroverted members.” Currently, the “buffet” option would seem like a good design for this. Having an array of formats speaks to demonstrating mastery, agency, diversity, and equity. There could be a more significant effort for TFs to find our students' particular talents and interests and invite them to share them in the course. One exciting activity another HGSE class did was to ask students for their favorite poem. For a few days for the remainder of the semester, each students' favorite poem got a brief period on the course page. One easy way TFs our teachers can provide opportunities to engage in this way is to create Slack channels such as #poetry or even something like #HPLHaikus. By assigning a TF with interest in poetry to share poetry somewhat regularly there and inviting others to join on the general channel, groups can begin to form around the gifts of community members.

Here let us touch on the concept of designing a community around “gifts”, as in Peter Block’s book Community: The Structure of Belonging. When people design a community around their gifts instead of their deficits (many such communities of that type exist - think social services, counseling, criminal justice, etc.), it makes the community into a fun and easy place to participate. Courses such as Karen Brennan’s Design for Learning leverage this insight to embed students' unique talents, such as poetry or artistry, in notable course areas. It may be helpful to draw upon the community's vision as a shared space for exploration and innovation by students. What if the diversity/introversion question, for instance, was pitched to students? They might come up with some good ideas for ways that their particular cohort or course community could create spaces around the gifts of members. Ultimately, as students gain an awareness of the people in their community and their gifts, barriers begin to break down, and people will feel like they have gotten a chance to know one another.

Major writes that “Rarely do online environments have aspects that can help students feel like they belong and create a sense of connection to the environment...common spaces equivalent to hallways, coffee shops, or quads.” (Major, 2015) For instructors and students alike, encouraging, envisioning, creating and curating such experiences can demonstrate the centrality of members’ agency. At Harvard, students have access to a Zoom account and can create meetings with other students easily on their own time. Increasingly, people are experimenting with enduring synchronous channels for the community. Faculty could create some Zoom rooms which are consistently open to act as a "student lounge" where people could drop in around the clock. As more digital infrastructure makes virtual synchronicity easier to access, we should continue to experiment with its possibilites.

Citation:

Block, P. (2018). Community: The structure of belonging. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Community Canvas, The. (2020). The Community Canvas Framework. Retrieved from https://community-canvas.org/

Major, C. H. (2015). Teaching Online: A Guide to Theory, Research, and Practice. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press., doi:10.1353/book.38784.