High level table of contents and arc for player support content

[shereefb]

Context

We now know the format and schedule of player support content #192 as well as the razor by which we include content #115

Next step is to develop a high level table of contents that covers the arc of the content.

Criteria

• [ ] Low resolution content and arc of player support content
• [ ] Determine what is in sequence vs. "grab bag"
• [ ] Determine what is optional vs. mandatory

  Principles razor

In order for an issue to be marked as passing, the proposed solution must be aligned with our principles. Check off the principles that this solution is consistent with.

• [ ] Cultivate a learning community.
• [ ] Prioritize scale over quality
• [ ] Align incentives
• [ ] Build a team game
• [ ] Trust people's intentions and potential
• [ ] Enable self-organization & self-determination
• [ ] Map feedback loops
• [ ] Optimize for agility
• [ ] Simulation not preparation
• [ ] Sustain the tension between individual and collective gain

[shereefb]

related #209

[tannerwelsh]

Will unblock PS developers to run with these modules and start developing

[shereefb]

Cognitive apprenticeship RSG Feedback Inner critic Drama Triangle Emotional regulation / Vulnerability Interviewing skills Networking skills Portfolio building skills Job hunting skills Negotiation Clearing Learning to learn: reflection/blogging

[carlabagdonas]

Personal organization systems & skills Projection / accurate empathy Emotional regulation / grounding Restimulation / "owning your shit"

[WillGrant]

Here is the PR https://github.com/LearnersGuild/learning-os/pull/244

[simonlguild]

I have found myself trying to find a way of focussing what we are offering in the NTC. In conversation with Shereef today we played with changing the content mix of what we are offering and when. Below is one example. Thoughts?

A different NTC Arc model

• Reduce what we are offering in the home groups
• Offer other content in ‘brown bag lunch’ sessions

Home groups become all about collaboration

• What do people need to learn collaboratively?
• What do people need to learn to work collaboratively?

Answer: I and We skills, and some systems (systems of oppression)

Example session: 10 mins awareness practice 40 mins content intro/exercise, eg. Deep listening, difficult conversations, self awareness etc 10 mins Q&C 25 mins check in’s/clearings 5 mins awareness practice - how are you now?

• Content builds over weeks
• Practice between sessions
• Focus on commitments and accountabilities

Schedule:

• Learners would make a commitment to be part of the group, once a week, for a phase at a time - 5 weeks (question of whether to make the first phase broccoli)
• At the start of the next phase the content to be presented would be introduced and learners could choose to opt into or out of the group for the next phase of 5 weeks
• Content would be broccoli (chosen by the facilitator/support team)
• All sessions in a phase would be required once the commitment was made

Different flavor options: Home Group as support group - commitments/accountabilities - Lower facilitator skills Home Group as Process group - Higher facilitator skills

Learning to Learn and some of Systems..

• would be a big part of the orientation
• would then be offered as brown bag lunch sessions

Pluses for this model:

• Simplifying what we are trying to offer in the home groups
• More focus in the home groups as covering less terrain

Minuses for this model:

• Learning to Learn and Systems not given as much focus

[tannerwelsh]

Clarifying question about the language here:

What do people need to learn collaboratively?

I assume this is meant to say "What do people need in order to learn collaboratively?"

[tannerwelsh]

Learners would make a commitment to be part of the group, once a week, for a phase at a time - 5 weeks (question of whether to make the first phase broccoli)

:+1: to making the first phase broccoli. The first phase is enculturation and orientation. The shared experience is important to group bonding. Maybe even make the first 2 phases broccoli.

[tannerwelsh]

At the start of the next phase the content to be presented would be introduced and learners could choose to opt into or out of the group for the next phase of 5 weeks.

This is an interesting approach. Why split it into 5-week intervals? Why can't I choose to opt-in on a weekly basis? I.e. that way players can choose to attend sessions that will be most useful for them, and not sessions that are less useful/relevant.

All sessions in a phase would be required once the commitment was made

How would these sessions be required?

[tannerwelsh]

Overall, I'm in favor of making the player support offering simpler and more immediately relatable.

In the sports analogy, these support sessions should act as a consistent training/exercise session that players opt into in order to stay in shape and up their game.

I have a big question about the "required" / "optional" divide. My hope is that the support sessions will be like a team sports practice - they are not "required" in the sense that you can still play a game without attending team practice, but there are social consequences for not attending (e.g. less likely to be picked for team games).

If learners don't see these sessions as directly contributing to their "team game", that (to me) is a sign that our design is off.

In other words, our broccoli should be more like Popeye's spinach: the effects are more immediately apparent.

One way I could see us structuring it in this way is to make the support sessions (home groups) be "team process analysis with subsequent targeted exercise" sessions. So an example session would be:

1. 10 min check-in
2. 5 min review last week's "vitamin"
3. 15 min analyze effects of the "vitamin" on team process afterwards: how did it improve learning/working collaboratively?
4. 10 min discuss open questions/issues/concerns learners have about collaboration
5. 5 min facilitator chooses and introduces a "vitamin" (i.e. content/module) for this week
6. 30 min go through content exercise
7. 15 min closing

[tannerwelsh]

Finally, I have a concern about losing Learning to Learn in player support - if this isn't here, then I think we should "seed" some content (i.e. goals) in the game mechanics around learning to learn.

[awolfinthewind]

Here's the proposal for Play Testing:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eMOfJvprApnVFjHpFAIZ9wcWYPze75KwijQppg9iqDw/edit#