Spectrogram

Spectrogram

From Learning and training wiki

Share/Save/Bookmark
Revision as of 10:48, 19 October 2009 by Marco.perone (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Term2.png LAND OR SEA/SPECTOGRAM
It is a method to perform evaluations, assessments or for surveying people attitudes.

All you need to set-up a Spectogram is to draw a huge line on the floor of a big room (possibly represented by a rope), and ask a question that allows a range of answers (the opposite extremes of the line represent the two more adverse answers on the subject). Participants position themselves along the line according to their opinions, and a facilitator walks around and everyone explains their position. Participants are than encouraged to reposition themselves after having heard the comments in order to check whether they've changed their mind.


An advantage of the Land or Sea method, also known as Spectrogram, is the high involvement of the participants in debate around a topical (and ideally controversial) question, who are required to be part of the activity with their whole body and not just the head. It uses a physical space for mapping ideological and philosophical opinions around issues in a fun, dynamic and interactive way. [1]


Toolkit.png Conducting a Land or Sea Spectogram

Step by Step

  1. Lay out colored tape or a rape across an open floor. Ideally the tape stretches 15-20 meters. One end of the tape is marked as “Strongly Agree”, and the opposite end is labeled as “Strongly Disagree”. Cross-marks are made along the line.
  2. Invite participants to move toward the line and positioning themselves depending on their agreement or disagreement toward the statement.
  3. Place yourself into a position: the facilitator “interviews” people along the line, asking them why they are standing where they are: passion is encouraged in describing positioning, and listeners are encouraged to shift their position if the “interviews” alter their thinking and perspective on the question.
  4. Interpret the statements in a free way and means: such statements are deliberately structured to be vague and ambiguous to encourage participation.
  5. Doing wisely rephrasing and merging comments, the facilitator can progressively accompany the group to build a consensus on the way to go.
  6. Reach a consensus; where it is still hard to reach, the facilitator can acknowledge that explicitly and:
    • ask to the group if they agree on using the traditional vote method to make the decision;
    • ask to the group if they agree in postponing the decision - whenever possible - to allow for missing elements to be reconsidered all together.
  7. Discussion amongst the participants and raise a good “mapping” of the topics and opinions that people want to explore. It may lead in a lot of spontaneous laughter, which is an excellent way to build the energy of the day. [2]


References

  1. www.kstoolkit.org (30 July 2009)
  2. facilitation.aspirationtech.org (30 July 2009)