Artifacts might not be the right framing for collective output

My hypothesis that Collective artifacts structure collaborative learning and engagement might not be entirely accurate. In my Learning Groups I have realized that it is difficult to "create" together because we each have divergent goals of learning.

Also the idea of an "artifact" gives the sense that the output must be perfectly polished, while really my goal is not the final outcome but the process that it takes to get there. For a typical learning group with divergent goals, you should focus instead on providing the space (information and material) and verbs (processes and interactions) to create an Enabling environment for people to work towards more polished output and ideas.

This idea stems out of my concept around a Δ Model of engagement, and from this example of a group with divergent goals we could use this model to explore different potential Types of learning groups

Links to this note

Collective artifacts structure collaborative learning and engagement

Upon some practical experimentation with this idea I have discovered that Artifacts might not be the right framing for collective output. At least, not for every kind of group as different groups will be structured around different goals and motivations for learning. And framing as an "artifact" makes it feel like it has to be perfect and creates a psychological barrier to systematically working towards it.

Types of learning groups

Through facilitating a set of Learning Groups I have discovered that my hypothesis that Collective artifacts structure collaborative learning and engagement to be not entirely true and that Artifacts might not be the right framing for collective output. The reason for this is that the participants of the groups have divergent goals, which means that providing a goal of creating a single artifact is counter-intuitive. This leads me to consider how my Δ Model of engagement can be applied to understanding the different types of learning groups: