Tag: structure

  • Balancing Structure and Emergence in Teaching – Teaching in Higher Ed

    Balancing Structure and Emergence in Teaching – Teaching in Higher Ed

    Throughout my teaching career, I’ve often swung between two extremes when it comes to structure and flow. At times, I’ve been highly structured and organized—a good thing, but one that can become limiting when I miss what’s emerging in the moment. On the other end of the spectrum, if I lose track of the overall goals of a session or workshop, I risk not meeting my commitments or aligning with participants’ expectations. It also creates challenges for the broader structure of the course or event—whether it’s a class within a degree program or a workshop designed to support a university’s teaching and learning goals.

    Mia Zamora discusses this tension on Episode 475 of Teaching in Higher Ed: Making Space for Emergence. In the interview, she describes how we can create “buckets” to hold topics that we can explore together, which is especially helpful for the kind of class content that will be responding to what’s happening in an internal or external context, for example. In my business ethics class, we analyze news stories weekly, and there’s a “bucket” where our reflections and analysis can be placed.

    Alan Levine has co-taught with Mia previously and they both talk about courses having “spines” to keep the needed structure. You can see an example of their #NetNarratives class spine mid-way through Alan’s blog post: My #NetNar Reflection. On Episode 218, Alan discusses the importance of giving people opportunities to explore, as part of their learning. He shares:

    You get better by just practicing. Not rote practicing, but stuff where you’re free to explore.

    Speaking of exploring… I just went to visit Alan’s CogDogBlog – and discovered a recent post with “one more thing about podcasts” where he talks about a cool podcast directory that I wasn’t aware of… and ways of sharing one’s podcast feed with others. Now it is taking every ounce of discipline not to go down the rabbit trail of discovering more. But I leave for Louisiana in three days, the semester starts tomorrow, and I have a 5:30 AM keynote on Tuesday morning. All this to say, I had better behave myself and share a few more things about facilitiation I’ve been thinking about, as I prepare for those adventures.

    Two Additional Approaches for Managing the Tension Between Structure and Flow

    Over time, I’ve discovered two other helpful strategies for balancing structure and in-the-moment flexibility. These tools and insights have transformed how I prepare for and facilitate learning experiences.

    1. SessionLab: Visualizing and Adjusting the Flow

    A while back, I discovered a tool called SessionLab, and it’s become a game-changer, especially when preparing workshops. It helps me create a “run of show” document—something Kevin Kelly has discussed both on Episode 406: How to Create Flexibility for Students and Ourselves, as well as in his book on flexibility in teaching: Making College Courses Flexible Supporting Student Success Across Multiple Learning Modalities. A run of show outlines the timing, activity titles, descriptions, and any additional information for a session, helping me stay on track while leaving space for flexibility.

    SessionLab allows me to break down a workshop or class into blocks of time and activities. Though it includes a library of standard activities, I mostly use it to map out my own. One of my favorite features is the ability to highlight sections in the “additional information” column. This has been a game-changer for virtual facilitation. For example, when sharing resources or instructions during a Zoom session, I pre-highlight key content so I can easily copy and paste it into the chat in real time.

    Beyond that, the tool allows you to color-code blocks to visually assess the balance between different types of learning activities—like how much time you’re spending on lecture versus active learning. It even lets you generate a PDF version for offline reference.

    This morning, I was preparing for Tuesday morning’s keynote and realized (yet again) I’d tried to squeeze too much into my allotted time. SessionLab helped me get realistic about pacing, build in breathing room, and ensure space for those organic moments that make these moments of learning in community so powerful. After all, if everything were going to be rigidly planned, why not just record a video and skip live interaction altogether?

    If you’re looking for a tool to help you balance structure with flexibility, I highly recommend giving SessionLab a try.

    2. Padlet: Unlocking a Hidden Feature for Better Facilitation

    The second resource I want to highlight is in an upcoming book by Tolu Noah on facilitation: Designing and Facilitating Workshops with Intentionality: A Guide to Crafting Engaging Professional Learning Experiences in Higher Education. I had the privilege of reading an advance copy, and it felt like every page introduced me to a new tool or a fresh way of thinking.

    One of many insights that stood out was a feature I hadn’t realized existed in Padlet, a virtual corkboard I already use often for collaborative activities. Tolu explained that you can create breakout links to share just a single column from a Padlet board rather than the entire board.

    This has been incredibly helpful for making my Padlet boards more user-friendly. Before, when I shared an entire board, participants sometimes found it visually overwhelming—unsure where to post their contributions. Now, if I’m running an activity with multiple columns (e.g., ideas related to sustainability in one, corporate social responsibility in another), I can send a direct link to the specific column where I want participants to share. It simplifies the process and improves clarity for everyone.

    When Tolu Noah’s book comes out, I can’t recommend it enough—it’s packed with facilitation wisdom and practical strategies for creating more engaging learning environments.

    Resources

    Here’s a summary of the tools and people mentioned in this post:

    • Episode 475 with Mia Zamora
    • Episode 218 with Alan Levine
    • SessionLab – A tool for creating run-of-show plans, structuring workshops, and balancing structure with flexibility.
    • Kevin Kelly – Educator and author who explores flexibility in teaching and learning; referenced for his insights on “run of show” documents.
    • Making College Courses Flexible Supporting Student Success Across Multiple Learning Modalities – Kevin Kelly’s book: “Addressing students’ increasing demand for flexibility in how they complete college courses, this book prepares practitioners to create equivalent learning experiences for students in the classroom and those learning from home, synchronously or asynchronously.”
    • Padlet – A virtual corkboard tool for collaborative activities, with a feature for sharing breakout links to individual columns.
    • Tolu Noah – Educator and author of a forthcoming book on facilitation, emphasizing practical strategies for inclusive teaching.
    • Designing and Facilitating Workshops with Intentionality: A Guide to Crafting Engaging Professional Learning Experiences in Higher Education – Tolu Noah’s forthcoming book: “Workshops are one of the most frequently used forms of professional learning programming in higher education and beyond. However, in order for them to have a meaningful impact, they must be crafted with intentionality. Designing and Facilitating Workshops with Intentionality_ offers practical guidance, tools, and resources that can help you create more engaging, enriching, and effective workshops for adult learners.”

    Source link

  • Einstein on the internal structure of protons and neutrons

    Einstein on the internal structure of protons and neutrons

    Please follow and like us:

    Einstein’s Explanation of the Unexplainable

    It can be shown Einstein may have been able to derive the internal structure of protons and neutrons if he was aware they had one before he died.  This is because he was the first to define the flexibility of the spatial dimensions when he defined the force of gravity in terms of a curvature in them.

    Observations of hadrons such as protons and neutrons confirmed they are made up of distinct components called quarks of which there are six types, the UP/Down, Charm/Strange and Top/Bottom. The Up, Charm and Top have a fractional charge of 2/3. While the Down, Strange and Bottom have a fractional charge of -1/3. However, no one has been able to define their internal structure in terms of observations.

    However, another property of quarks defined by Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD), is their color charge which are red, green, and blue. It assumes each one is made up of three different colors of quarks red, blue and green and only the combinations of the colors that produce “white” can be found in a stable particle.

    It will be shown the color charge of each quark represents orientation of three two-dimensional plane (xy, yz, xz) of three-dimensional space responsible of its charge.

    For example, red would represent the xy plane green, the yz, and blue xz. The fact that three-dimensional space contains only one of each explains why particle must be composed of one each color to be stable.

    However, before we begin, we must first define how and why the color charge of a quark is related to the two-dimensional planes mentioned earlier

    As was shown in Article 12 (page 61) the alternating charge of an electromagnetic wave are the result of displacement in the two-dimensional planes of space that it is moving on. .

    Briefly it showed the electric and magnetic components of an electromagnetic wave are the result of a spatial displacement in the two-dimensional “surface” of three-dimension space.

    One can understand the mechanism responsible by using the analogy of how a wave on the two-dimensional surface of water causes a point on that surface to become displaced or rise above or below the equilibrium point that existed before the wave was present.

    The science of wave mechanics tells us a force would be developed by these displacements which would result in the elevated and depressed portions of the water moving towards or becoming “attracted” to each other and the surface of the water.

    Similarly, an energy wave on the “surface” of the two spatial dimensions that are perpendicular to the axis of gravitational forces would cause a point on that “surface” to become displaced or rise above and below the equilibrium point that existed before the wave was present.

    Therefore, classical wave mechanics, if extrapolated to the properties of two of the three spatial dimensions of our universe tell us a force will be developed by the differential displacements caused by an energy wave on it which will result in its elevated and depressed portions moving towards or become “attracted” to each other as the wave moves through space.

    This would define the causality of the attractive electrical fields associated with an electromagnetic wave in terms of a force caused by the alternating displacements of a wave moving with respect to time on a “surface” of the two spatial dimensions which are perpendicular to the axis of gravitational forces.

    However, it also provides a classical mechanism for understanding why similar electrical fields repel each other. This is because observations of waves show there is a direct relationship between the magnitude of a displacement in its “surface” to the magnitude of the force resisting that displacement.

    Similarly, the magnitude of a displacement in a “surface” of the two spatial dimensions will be greater than that caused by a single one. Therefore, they will repel each other because the magnitude of the force resisting the displacement will be greater than it would be for a single one.

    One can also derive the magnetic component of an electromagnetic wave in terms of the horizontal force developed along the axis that is perpendicular to the displacement caused by its peaks and troughs associated with the electric fields. This would be analogous to how the perpendicular displacement of a mountain generates a horizontal force on the surface of the earth, which pulls matter horizontally towards the apex of that displacement.

    Even though the above explanation of how a charge is related to an alternating displacement in the “surface” of three-dimensional space it also can explain a static one in terms of their relative positions in.

    For example, Einstein showed us if a two-dimensional plane is displaced with respect to another in three-dimensional space a force responsible for static charge would be developed similar as was shown earlier to how the peaks and valleys of an electromagnetic did.

    As was mentioned earlier Einstein define forces such as gravity in terms of the flexibility of the spatial dimensions.

    However, one can derive the internal structure of protons and neutrons if one assumes orientation of the color charges of quarks are the result of the flexibility of the two-dimensional planes which earlier were defined as being responsible for them.

    This is because for a proton or neutron to be stable in three-dimension space the orientation of the xy, yz, and xz dimensional planes must perpendicular to each other

    If they are not, they will be unstable.

    For examine the two up quarks of proton each with a color charge of two would contain 4 two-dimensional planes (one for each charge).  However, according to Einstein each dimensional plane has the flexibility to orient itself to oppose or cancel the charge of another one.  Therefore, when up quark combines with a down quark the two-dimensional plane that define its charge can orient itself to oppose or cancel one of the charges of the up quarks.  This means it will have forces only 3 of 4 dimensional planes associated with the 2 up quarks

    This will form a stable structure in three-dimensional space because it contains the (xy, yz, xz) planes which can be perpendicular to each other.

    Neutrons on the other hand contains one up quark and two down quarks.  It is neutral because the 1/3 charge on each of the two down quarks cancel the 2/3 charge of the up quark.

    But it also consists four two dimensional planes which means it cannot exist in three-dimensional space.

    However, when close enough to a proton it can borrow enough binding energy required to cause its two down quarks to line up along the same two-dimensional plane of three-dimension space. This will result in that plane having the opposite color charge of two down quarks which will result in a neutron having no charge when it interacts with the two charges of the up quark This also means the xy, yz, xz planes would define the three-dimensional volume of a neutron it because they do not have any of the forces that define it color charge. This is true even though one may have twice the color charge of the other two. This will result in it being stable when near enough to borrow some binding energy from proton

    However. when a neutron it is not the two two-dimensional planes that define the color charges of the down quarks will not line up resulting in it having 4 dimensional planes resulting in it being unstable and decaying in a proton electron and neutrino.

    As was mentioned earlier a stable electric charge is the result of a static spatial displacement in a two-dimensional plain of the three-dimensional space.

    This suggests one could describe their geometry in terms of how those planes are oriented.

    For example, if a proton is made up two up quarks each with a positive charge of 2/3 and its charge is the result of a displacement in dimensional plane of three-dimensional space each one would contain 2 and combined would contain 4.

    However, this means a proton would consist of four spatial dimensions which could not exist in our three-dimensional universe.  Therefore, to correct that it attracts a down quark which has a negative or opposite spatial displacement with respect to one of those dimensional planes.  This would reduce its spatial properties to three allowing it to exist in our universe.

    However, it also would change their orientation with respect each other. Instead of being perpendicular it would be 60-degree. This is because as was just mentioned the 2 up quarks of a proton would contain 4 dimensional planes creating four-dimensional spatial object which cannot exist in three-dimensional space.  However, when it combines with the negative dimensional energy Einstein would have associated a down quark it cancels out one of the four dimensional planes associated with the 2 up quarks of a proton leaving only three which can exist in three-dimensional space.

    But when one removes one side of a square it allows one of three sides to connect to one of the others to form an equilateral triangle This suggest the energy associated with the rearraigning the orientation of dimensional planes from 90 degrees to 60 creating the object which is responsible for both the positive charge and stability of a proton. I believe Einstein would have come to this conclusion if he as was mentioned earlier, he had known protons had an internal structure.

    Amazon

    Please follow and like us:

    Source link