1. Vanessa Andreotti Global Education Derby/Mundi Nottingham University
The methodology of Open Spaces for Dialogue and Enquiry (OSDE):
Conceptual Framework
Vanessa Andreotti Global Education Derby/Mundi
Nottingham University
Vanessa Andreotti
Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice School of Politics and International Relations The university of Nottingham

2. Context: Development Education
The DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION ASSOCIATION defines development education as lifelong learning that:
explores the links between people living in the "developed" countries of the North with those of the "developing" South, enabling people to understand the links between their own lives and those of people throughout the world
increases understanding of the economic, social, political and environmental forces which shape our lives
develops the skills, attitudes and values which enable people to work together to take action to bring about change and take control of their own lives
works towards achieving a more just and a more sustainable world in which power and resources are more equitably shared.

3. Context: Development Education
Focus: North-South relations/interdependence
Global citizenship education (participation and responsibility towards the wider community)
Curriculum: the ‘Global Dimension’ – introduction of global issues and perspectives in all subjects:
Government (DFID): beyond compassion and charity towards an understanding of interdependence
“education should empower young people with the knowledge, skills and understanding to play an active role as global citizens”

4. The OSDE methodology
Set of procedures to structure safe spaces for dialogue and enquiry about global issues and perspectives focusing on interdependence
Not telling people what to think or what to do
Encouragement of critical engagement
Critical = tracing origins and implications
Development of specific thinking skills

5. OSDE: Understanding the Theory

6. OSDE: Understanding the Theory

7. OSDE: Understanding the Theory
Our Lenses (the cellophane)…
Construct our perception of reality
Represent our assumptions about what is real, ideal and knowable – the categories through which we make sense of the world (ontologies and epistemologies)
Are not neutral, nor transparent – neither can they be removed (only transformed)
Are constructed in our contexts
Are influenced by the sets of meaning which we are exposed to (our cultures, class, gender, etc…)
Are the tools that we inherit to know/create our worlds

8. Lenses: implications

9. Lenses: implications
Production of Meaning: definition of what is real/ideal, good/bad, beautiful/ugly, what can/can’t be known – the strength of cultural reproduction, contestation and transformation
Construction of Identities: ‘us’ and ‘them’ (alterity) – how we feel about who we are in relation to others
Social relations (ethics): grounds of engagement with others (respect, solidarity, equality, equity, ‘tolerance’…)
Distribution of wealth and labour: worth of individuals, deservedness, merit, access
Politics: voices heard and influence in decision making

10. Pedagogical implications
Not the search for one absolute (non-biased/neutral) interpretation of reality, but…
Critical Literacy
Where is this coming from?
Where is this leading to?
…the examination of origins and implications of assumptions (perspectives/lenses/discourses)

11. Comparison: ‘Reading’ approaches
Traditional Reading
Critical Reading
Critical Literacy

12. Comparison: ‘Traditional’ Reading
Does the text represent the truth?
Is it fact or opinion?
Is it biased or neutral?
Is it well written/clear?
Who is the author and what level of authority/legitimacy does he/she represent?
What does the author say?
Focus on the ‘quality’ and ‘authority’ of the content

13. Comparison: ‘Critical’ Reading
What is the context?
To whom is the text addressed?
What is the intention of the author?
What is the position of the author (his/her political agenda)?
What is the author trying to say and how is he/she trying to convince/manipulate the reader?
What claims are not substantiated?
Focus on context, intentions, communication and ‘reflection’

14. Comparison: ‘Critical Literacy’
What are the assumptions behind the statements?
How does the author understand reality? What is shaping his/her understanding?
Who decides (what is real, can be known or needs to be done) in whose name and for whose benefit?
What are the implications of his/her claims (past/present/future: social, environmental, economic, etc…)?
What are the sanctioned ignorances (blind spots) and contradictions?
Focus on knowledge production, power, representation, implications and reflexivity

15. Reflection versus Reflexivity
Decision
Why do I want to do this?
What are my assumptions?
Reflection
Decision
How were my assumptions constructed?
What are the implications of thinking in this way?
Are there other ways of looking at the issue?
Reflexivity

16. OSDE: grounding principles
a) that each individual brings valid knowledge to the open space (everyone is a pot of knowledge!)
b) that this knowledge deserves respect (everyone should have the right to express themselves without fear of being ‘looked down’ by others and should be committed to listening to others with respect)
c) that all knowledge is related to who you are and where you come from (we construct the lenses we look through at the world in our contexts and interactions with others)
d) that all knowledge is partial and incomplete (we all see the world through different lenses that continuously change and there are no universally better or clearer lenses)
e) that all knowledge can and should be questioned through dialogue (we should engage critically with actions, thoughts and beliefs of both ourselves and others as we need different lenses – other perspectives - to challenge and transform our own views).

17. OSDE: structure of an enquiry
Engagement with stimulus (prompting cognitive dissonance)
Airing of views - in pairs
Informed thinking – where to find out more
Reflexive questions - individually (related to own perspectives)
Open Space questions – in small groups (focus on different logics and power + origins and implications of perspectives)
Airing of burning questions and views
Responsible choices – in small groups (decision making processes related to the theme)
Debriefing (reflection on learning process and quality of space)

18. OSDE FAQ: Most Frequently Asked Questions
Does this learning process translate into ‘action’?
Is it too rational?
Does it lead to confusion and/or paralysis?
Does it produce measurable outcomes?
Does it question the authority of the teacher in the classroom?
Won’t we help more (the Third World) if we get pupils to take action (instead of focusing on reflection)?
What is your (hidden) agenda?

19. OSDE: Agenda Integrated Logic of rights, justice and autonomy
Trends of thought
Logic of rights, justice and autonomy
Logic of care, relationship and responsibility
Judgemental ranking
Relational (non-hierarchical) thinking
worldcentric
Gilligan’s model:
Other perspectives matter
Rights and justice to all human beings
Care and compassion to all human beings
ethnocentric
Only the perspectives of my equals matter
Rights and justice for my group, tribe, nation, continent
Care and compassion for my group, tribe or nation
egocentric
Only my perspectives matter
Selfish in agentic ways
Selfish in communal ways

20. More about the OSDE theory/practice and the International Research?
Contact:
Vanessa Andreotti
Research Fellow/Education Co-ordinator
Centre for Social and Global Justice
Nottingham University