The COVID-19 crisis has revealed the limitations in the education system that could have been resolved by the Classroom 2.0 programme of blended and networked learning. This chapter presents the Emotivate Project that took place before this crisis and showed how it is possible to deliver cross-community education to provide evidence in support of the big society and free schools agenda. Cross-community education is called School 3.0, and lessons from this chapter could be learned so that it is possible to deliver education in such a way that pandemics do not bring the education system down in the way they have during COVID-19.
TopIntroduction
Continuing with the premise set forth in the abstract, by stopping tying the hands of the or- ganisations that want to take part in improving community taking the initiative to change it, the government can do more than it could by taking a leading role. As this chapter shows, with only financial support from government, a lot can be achieved by those outside of it using responsible capitalism and community cooperativism. When one gets away from the tribal party politics and focussed on the didactic then anything is possible. The Emotivate Project aimed to improve the social cohesion between the communities of Treforest and Llantwit Fardre, as stated in the grant applications. These included, that we set out to educate young people about the arts and make a visible contribution to the community by improving the local environment and to encourage the use of electronic learning methods. We also aimed to improve cultural, economic and environmental development of the local communities as well as increase the social cohesion between the local communities. Furthermore, we set out to engage with local community members and encourage participation in improving the local environment and the local community as well as engage with socially excluded people within the community including young offenders and people on probation.
Intellectual capital is intellectual material, such as knowledge, information, intellectual property, and experience, which can be put to use to create wealth (Stewart, 1997). Intellectual assets are things such as written documents, software, musical compositions and so forth, which are created by humans and can be exploited by an undertaking to achieve their objects (Davis & Harrison, 2001). The actors in the project consisted of the Managing Director taking on the role of ‘Internal Affairs Manager’, the Company Secretary taking on the role of ‘Project Manager’ and one of the Non-Executive Directors taking on the role of ‘External Affairs Manager’. Actors that were brought in included the learning ‘Instructors’ and ‘Facilitators’ and of course the beneficiaries of the project, the ‘Learners’. The systems used in the project included ‘Accounting’, ‘Booking’, ‘Project Management’ and ‘Learning Management’. Tools used by the young people included Moodle run on PCs in an extended school, and the instruments associated with painting. The landscapers used the obvious tools for planting, and it was generally the case that all persons in the project used email for communication.
A. Virtual and Physical EnvironmentsThe relationship between what is in the mind and how it links to what is in the world has been studied for centuries. Some studies attempted to show that the human mind can impact the external world through thought alone (Rhine & Rhine, 1943). However, because emotions are expressed through facial, prosody, dialogue and other forms of affect, it is these sometimes minutely expressed emotions that are detected rather than anything supernatural. Understanding the effect physical environments like classrooms and virtual environment like networked learning communities have on learners with specific learning styles makes it possible to analyse and influence their behaviour systematically.
Differences between the virtual and physical environment have long been spoken of, including whether it is possible to experience existential support through virtual communities (Mantovani, 1996; Putnam et al., 2003; Van Dijk, 2012; Wellman & Gulia, 1999). It has also been argued that virtual communities are comparable to contracts or constitutions (Rheingold & Weeks, 2012). Virtual communities as described in this way do not permit the sharing of actual emotions, only those that are generated through intentional expressions such as emoticons or emojis (Mantovani, 1996). The most “seductive” virtual environments are those where learners can control and adapt the user interface in line with their competencies (Mantovani, 1996).