A film director’s challenge : To manage – to manage? – The creative process in a film project

The aim of this text is to discuss how it is possible to manage the art creating process in a film project, where the circumstances are often turbulent. In normative project management literature one proceeds from the idea that a project is realised in a stable world from a clear goal. In a film project there is often a need to change your plans, to improvise both in front of the camera as well as behind the camera. In the theoretical cinematic literature the responsibility for the final film text is more and more being viewed as a product of not only the director, but of the whole team’s work. Consequently, the narrative of leadership/management in a film team can be viewed from a relational perspective where the director and those s/he interacts with, are responsible for the action, relations and social situations they construe jointly in the process of filmmaking. The organization of a film project is a temporary one. The members of a team are seldom the same from one production to another, as well as the creative process always being unique. According to process thinking, organizing can be seen as the ongoing creative activity where we structure and stabilize the chaotic, moving reality. As concerns a film project, the process of becoming of the filmic expression; careful plans, on the one hand, and improvisation and flexibility in action, on the other hand, are a precondition for its realisation. The director when setting a linguistic formulation to what is to be done, can be considered as a practical author.

The invisible hand: transversal thinking with new materialism in curriculum design

This proposal invites participation in a design intensive, in which educators bring along an idea for a unit, seminar, lecture, lesson as the basis for a practical and creative workshop merging conceptual art, writing, poetry and curriculum planning, while engaging playfully with New Materialism. In this work we seek to move beyond merely interrogating designs for future subjects, and to embolden our thinking about curriculum, asking questions to explore how the pedagogical imagination works with both the material and immaterial, the corporeal and incorporeal, within ecologies continually transforming in the process of making. Through this, we explore ways to challenge “delivery”, or “conduit” metaphors of education, to see design as “situated” in new ways involving both human and nonhuman elements, resisting stasis, resisting closure. This workshop positions curriculum design in the realm of the artist/activist, rather than that of the bureaucrat/technician and opens up a space for reflection on the processes of making curriculum. The workshop also therefore seeks to question how knowledge around curriculum is produced, and to document the ways in which our work as educators is part of a continuous becoming, as we ourselves, and our designs, co-emerge. We remember that curriculum design is fundamentally a creative project, always taking form and transforming in relation to what surrounds us, rather residing in documents, which tend to conceal the entanglements around their making. Instead, we embody and live curriculum; it is happening now

Remixing as a creative and social approach to learning design

This paper discusses the concepts of remixing and morphing in learning design. In particular, it focuses on how the authors used approaches and findings from a high school action research study to inform their work in higher education. This was done in an attempt to build authentic and active student learning experiences that align with the needs of the 21st Century, and they argue that remixing offers a creative and social approach to the designing of learning. The high school study embedded social and participatory media into the face-to-face classroom. This opened up opportunities for students to interact and share user-generated content. The authors discuss how they have used the approaches and findings from this high school study in their work in teacher education and pre-service teacher education, as well in as learning design in the Business and Law Faculty. The authors' university has a strategic plan that identifies the world as globally connected, with new ideas available at the touch of a button and innovation 'anywhere' and at 'any time' and this paper supports that agenda. Using the concept of remixing the authors build on their previous work in learning design and make explicit the sharing nature within a remix approach. The use of the concept of remix is demonstrated within a bigger picture of what is sometimes called 'course-wide' thinking. The authors argue that this work contributes evidence and analysis that can inform course designers, practitioner-researchers and the work of academics, from across disciplines, to design courses that recognise and support active student learning.

Systems 1 and 2 thinking processes and cognitive reflection testing in medical students

Background: Diagnostic decision-making is made through a combination of Systems 1 (intuition or pattern-recognition) and Systems 2 (analytic) thinking. The purpose of this study was to use the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) to evaluate and compare the level of Systems 1 and 2 thinking among medical students in pre-clinical and clinical programs. Methods: The CRT is a three-question test designed to measure the ability of respondents to activate metacognitive processes and switch to System 2 (analytic) thinking where System 1 (intuitive) thinking would lead them astray. Each CRT question has a correct analytical (System 2) answer and an incorrect intuitive (System 1) answer. A group of medical students in Years 2 & 3 (pre-clinical) and Years 4 (in clinical practice) of a 5-year medical degree were studied. Results: Ten percent (13/128) of students had the intuitive answers to the three questions (suggesting they generally relied on System 1 thinking) while almost half (44%) answered all three correctly (indicating full analytical, System 2 thinking). Only 3-13% had incorrect answers (i.e. that were neither the analytical nor the intuitive responses). Non-native English speaking students (n = 11) had a lower mean number of correct answers compared to native English speakers (n = 117: 1.0 s 2.12 respectfully: p < 0.01). As students progressed through questions 1 to 3, the percentage of correct System 2 answers increased and the percentage of intuitive answers decreased in both the pre-clinical and clinical students. Conclusions: Up to half of the medical students demonstrated full or partial reliance on System 1 (intuitive) thinking in response to these analytical questions. While their CRT performance has no claims to make as to their future expertise as clinicians, the test may be used in helping students to understand the importance of awareness and regulation of their thinking processes in clinical practice.