Hodges' Model: Welcome to the QUAD: pragmatics

Hodges' model is a conceptual framework to support reflection and critical thinking. Situated, the model can help integrate all disciplines (academic and professional). Amid news items, are posts that illustrate the scope and application of the model. A bibliography and A4 template are provided in the sidebar. Welcome to the QUAD ...

Showing posts with label pragmatics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pragmatics. Show all posts

Sunday, March 23, 2025

Is it? Can it be? An elevator pitch!

How many times have people asked me?

"If you were to explain Hodges' model as an elevator pitch what would you say?"

So, what would it be?

I wrote this on twitter and think it's a step in the right direction - domains: 

There is -
              *Person, self, individual ..
*Other(s), collective, pop.. 
      (a) person has MIND & BODY (for now!) 
(a) person is supported by ALL Others 
We call this Humanity
For the majority all bridges *cognitively* accessible:
n.b. Politicians, policy makers

Saturday, March 16, 2024

Hodges' model: An architectonic sense-making tool

"Translation by architectonic map is a sense-making tool inspired by Peirce's use of the term, architectonic, to describe the systematic form of a body of knowledge. Theorists create a structure around which their approach to understanding human conduct is built. Familiarity with the overall structure facilitates generalized discourse among those interested in the framework. An architectonic map identifies all the major components of a scientific text or canon, including its assumptions, concepts, propositions, and theories, and the paths connecting these components. Mapping architectonics is an intersemiotic (across two different types of sign systems) translation process when the translation product is a diagram, and an intralingual process when the product is a narrative." p.111. (My emphasis)

"Models employ symbols (terms and their meanings), but also have an iconic function (a design meant to represent a object or process in important ways) and an indexical function (notation indicating and pointing to persons, processes, relationships, organizations)." p.112. 


Individual
|
      INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               
HUMANISTIC  --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      
 SOCIOLOGY  :    POLITICAL 
|
Group
person

concepts

critical thinking

person

maps

framework


languages

dialogue - narrative

shared understanding

social worlds*

anthropology

organisations

communities of practice

professions, scope of practice

*translation here too:

policy, power, status ...


Forte, J. A. (2009). Interactionist Practice: A Signs, Symbols, and Social Worlds Approach. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 32(1), 86–122. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23263237


Sunday, January 22, 2023

Philosophy in Pubs - Liverpool Weds 25th Jan 7.30pm

Subscribed to Philosophy in Pubs for many years, I've posted to the list also in the distant past, but I've never attended a meeting. This past week I noticed a message about a new subgroup - Young Philosophers - in Liverpool from Mike (phone numbers removed). Below, I've posted some of the online chat:

On Saturday, 14 January 2023 at 14:38:50 GMT, <info AT philosophyinpubs.co.uk> wrote:
Hi everybody,
 
Its Mike from the Keith's PIP and the young philosophers group.
I am currently re-launching the latter as a new PIP group at
Thomas Rigby's in town
(23-25 Dale St, Liverpool L2 2EZ)
 
The first meeting of the Philosophy group will be
Wednesday evening the 25th January at 7.30pm.
Please come along, all welcome, all ages.
 
If you need anymore  information, please email me (email below) or call me on ...
 
Thanks
Mike Green.
michaelljohngreen AT gmail.com 

This piqued my interest, given my love of Liverpool (born in Walton) and the question of at what age can younger people - children be introduced to Hodges' model?

I replied expressing interest in the possibility of contributing, once the group is established, or as a 'starter for 10', seeking critique as to what sense young philosophers would make of the model.

Responding with an introduction to Hodges' model, and expression of interest, Paul and Rob replied as per below, to which I've tried to add some clarification.

Rob's thoughts are very helpful. The upshot is, I'm looking f/w to a full day in Liverpool this Wednesday, meeting Mike, Paul, Rob and possibly others before the meeting starts at 7.30pm.

Paul's message (intended for me):

info AT philosophyinpubs.co.uk
Sunday, 15 January 2023 at 13:00:12 GMT
Subject:
Re: New PIP group!

Hi Mike, Peter

Yes, you seem to be part of quite a sizeable group of people on our general members/mailing list that have not gotten round to attending one of the groups yet. But that's okay, absolutely no need for apologies, your interest is appreciated anyway.

I've had a quick glance at your attachments; found what I read very interesting and would like to know more. I don't think I've heard of the Hodges' model, or at least not in relation to what we generally practice (Community of Enquiry method).

It's great that you would like to contribute or provide a session regarding the Hodges' model, but I'm not sure if doing that would fit well with this particular opening meeting of a new PIP group. Having said that, I could be very mistaken, and an introduction in the manner you mention, might be a great way to get people thinking and herald a fruitful meeting. The meeting is due to start at 7.30pm - (meetings usually take one and a half to two hours), but if you like I could meet you there half an hour earlier. Let me know.

We have something called the Enquiry Development Series (EDS) running at the moment. It's a monthly Online event which is run for PIP members and others to learn/refresh their undertanding and practices. You would be most welcome to attend.

Best regards,

Paul ...

PS: I have cc'd some members of the EDS in with this reply.

From Rob:

On 2023-01-16 12:44, fappyhealing02 AT yahoo.co.uk wrote:

Hi Everyone,

From my very limited reading on Hodge's model. It seems to be concerned with very similar issues to those of PIPs and the CofE community, which is an expression of prior analysis, critique and reflection coming from people like Dewey, Postman, Freire, Lipman and so on. I have a basic grasp of the model as a conceptual framework and a means to better care and understanding across society. What I don't seem to have picked up so much is a more fully developed methodology rooted in practice and realisation of these ideas.

This leads me wonder whether this model/framework is mainly conceptual, with limited  methodological guidance towards how the ideas in the framework are to be expressed and realised. PIPs is at the stage where it has a very successful methodology which realises and expresses in practice the ideas that Hodge points to, along with the philosophy of education eluded to earlier and various other frameworks such as the Paul and Elder model of critical thinking.

So, we have the history and philosophical education from Socrates onwards, the comes a distillation of these ideas into a framework or model, which is where we find Piaget, Bloom, Paul and Elder, along with Hodge and others. These models then have to be cashed out in practice. At this point, we are now thinking about methodology, there is of course connection, influence and overlap with the history, philosophy and subsequent frameworks. Methodologies vary from being barely formed to being well formed and robust. I would say PIPs and CofE have a well formed and somewhat robust methodological practice. It has been well tested and critiqued for over 40 years in different countries, communities and contexts. It has stood the test of time with a good pedigree. Matt Lipman was a key figure in developing a methodology out of his research into philosophy of education and various frameworks/models. However the methodology he produced to deliver in practice was something of a prototype rather than the more fully formed, finished article. Through time and careful reflection people like R Sutcliffe and Karin Muris took Lipman's methods improved and polished them into the practice we see and use 40 years later. This is of course still developing along democratic and dialogic lines.

In the case of Edward De Bonno, Paul and Elder, Illich and Dewey we find some powerful insights, some partially formed models and some fully formed models but not that much guidance on how to implement these ideas. Yes, they provide some ideas and pointers on how to go about the realisation of these things in practice but methodology on the whole is pretty sparse. I guess it's a case of focussing on a specific group of concerns comes at the cost of other concerns, though, I don't want to take this too far and slip into zero-sum thinking. Anyway, based on limited understandings I'd provisionally put Hodge in this category of well formed model, limited methodology in terms of the nuts and bolts of how to best realise the model in practice.

Questions I'm left with:

Is the distinction between model and methodology a significant and useful one here - why? Yes/No, because...?

Given our current point of development and understanding, by doing what we do, are we already cashing out a good deal of the key ideas in Hodge's model?

Could we just clarify what Hodge's model is a model of?

Do I need some help in understanding Hodge better in terms of both 'model' and 'methodology'?

This isn't to say we should not draw inspiration and ideas or take time to explore and experiment with Hodge's model, just that I need to be clearer about what it is, what it's trying to do, how it is going to do it. Once more secure with this, I feel I'd be in a better position to make more competent judgements and recommendations about its uses and benefits.

Best wishes,

Rob

My reply:

Subject: Re: New PIP group!

Thanks for the messages - just caught up I think...

I wondered originally Mike - about your young philosopher's group and once established asking the group the questions that Rob has posed and responded to.

I'm seeking critique, not proposing that Hodges' model is adopted by PIP.

The questions posed by the model - might gainfully exercise younger minds, and provide me with some pointers - which I would make clear (from ethics / consent perspective).

I greatly appreciate Rob's thoughts*.

A question I have educationally is from what age (literacy level) which Hodges' model #h2cm might be taught (discovered?).

I'd be pleased to come through on the 25th Mike and Paul, arriving a bit earlier.

I'll get to Liverpool early a.m. train and make a day of it.

As per Rob, I'm still asking these questions of the model and enjoying the journey ... so, briefly in response:

There is no methodology associated with the model, it is 'agnostic' (whatever that means).

The model is situated - so clinically, the way the model is used is influenced by the patient, client, carer, student, manager ...

The model can provide a relational ontology - it incorporates several polarities, dichotomies, oppositions and instrumentally can facilitate dialectic engagement.

It can be applied (imho) for a variety of research and philosophical stances, standpoints - Qual , Quant, Mixed-methods ... all the -isms?

As you will no doubt appreciate, in education and health care (especially) we need *evidence-based* interventions.

In seeking possible theoretical underpinnings for #h2cm think (as Rob suggests) of the model as a giant conceptual corpus (drawing from Tim Berners-Lee's giant global graph).

The axes of the model represent the (conceptual) holistic bandwidth of the situation.

The model can wax and wane as per the context (scale, scope). In a reductive sense I see the four (care) knowledge domains as four 'conceptual spaces' (Gärdenfors).

h2cm can also find a 'home' in the semantic web and in education - the idea of 'threshold concepts' (Meyer and Land).

There is another tool, but this calls for a logician - if not a totally erroneous idea?

[ Note diametric oppositions in the model: e.g.
  • public understanding of science;
  • the extent of visualization in the humanities;
  • mental health (the self) and the State (politics, law) current Psycho-Economic crisis. ]
*ROB - and all - I'd be pleased to post your thoughts / response on the blog, if this is appropriate with links and text on PIPs.

I hope this helps and look f/w to next week - thanks for your interest too.

Best to all.

Peter
====

Clearly not the last word. Look f/w to Wednesday and learning more.

Sunday, May 05, 2019

Innovations: From Myths To Reality (Revisiting - Berkun, 2007)



Even though Brexit may have normalised hoarding, temporarily(?) at an economic level, I've been sorting some books to 'go' because of  'new' arrivals. Here then are some further reflections on Hodges' model as an innovation in response to Scott Berkun's 2007 title. As you can see there are many overlaps between Berkun's myths of innovation, which in the book are each given a chapter:

Myth #1: The Myth of the Epiphany

The creation of Hodges' model by Brian Hodges in the mid-1980s might be likened to an epiphany of sorts. I didn't ask that particular question when we met in 1998. It was however, more accurately a solution to the forthcoming challenge of Project 2000 and the revolution in the nurse education from schools of nursing to university based, undergraduate courses of study.



This educational, theory and practice-based focus is evident in the four purposes for the model's creation:
  1. Person-centred - holistic care;
  2. To bridge the theory - practice gap;
  3. To facilitate reflection and reflective practice;
  4. To support curriculum development.
If we are talking 'myths' too, how many of these issues were at the model's creation in the mid-1980s what we would term legacy issues now?

Myth #2: We Understand the History of Innovation

If the rise of ideas and the existence of 'fads' suggests that innovations wax and wane - falling out of fashion then - yes. There is a history. I'm assuming that the emphasis on models and theory development in nursing is past its 'golden age'? Whether we understand innovation in the healthcare, medicine, nursing, other disciplines is another question; especially socio-technically. I will return to this at #4.

Myth #3: There is a Method For Innovation

In healthcare there is a method: it is, the method (and methodology of) research that provides evidence for practice and hopefully policy.

(There's brainstorming too of course - for which h2cm is the gift.)

Myth #4: People Love New Ideas

New starters and students in many lines of work are usually made aware of their potential and status (wanted or not) as 'change agents'. Student nurses should be torch-bearers of new ideas that are evidence-based. Whatever our age as lifelong learners we should always be open to new ideas, especially with the advantages that experience brings to the work and testbench of ideas. Constructive criticism should help - by definition - to construct.

So often though, there is marked resistance to ideas whatever 'age' they are. The ongoing mantras are "We've always done it this way!"; or "This is quicker! Tried and tested!" ...

For the past decade (at least) the UK economy has been plagued by a productivity crunch. This is also affecting health care. Myths 1-4 can also be considered under the heading of 'progress'. How much do we understand 'progress'? An examination must reveal productivity and innovation as fundamental elements.

Myth #5: The Lone Inventor

As I may have mentioned before when we were taught Hodges' model (1987-1988 Manchester Polytechnical College - MMU) as students and informed that we must apply h2cm in a marked case study/assignment there were some mutterings. Students often contribute to the development and testing of countless theories and models.

Brian did not publish much on the model beyond a book chapter. In this sense there is a lone inventor and a lone champion drawing an immense number of additional sources (here since 2006 for example).

Myth #6: Good Ideas Are Hard to Find

Ideas are not hard to find. For Hodges' model this is quite ironic. Ironic because, of course, the model provides a net to help 'capture' not just good ideas - but a brainstorm full of them.

There's something even more important though:

Hodges' model can help us find ideas not as 'good' or 'bad' in the first instance, but to test the ideas across contexts to see how an idea might perform. Only then is an idea 'good' and suitable for purpose (see #9).

Myth #7: Your Boss Knows More About Innovation Than You

The defences of ritualised practice and accepted (ideas) practice are well established ...
  • Not invented here!
  • Not created - owned by me!
  • Who is Hodges?
Social media constantly espouses on 'true' leadership and how power is exercised and distributed (if at all), but for many leaders power is a factor and the pedigree of the ideas and strategies that are deployed is a political football.

Myth #8: The Best Ideas Win

The videotape recording standards is a regular lesson here. The best ideas often do not win.

Sometimes building something is not enough ... or is it?

Whatever the 'truth' here - I still believe there is a great resource in this model.

Is h2cm a compound instrument?
Is h2cm an implicit holistic theory?
Is h2cm a series of conceptual spaces?
Is h2cm all of these ... ?

I also believe the challenge of individual and population health has a long-tail as a legacy problem.

Whether h2cm 'wins' or not - its relevance for the problems and solutions of the 21st and 22nd centuries grows each day ...

Myth #9: Problems and Solutions

Management and organisational gurus often extol the virtue of 360 degree vision. Hodges' model can encourage this as there are several dimensions and dichotomies 'embedded' within. Of particular note in myth 9 is objective versus subjective qualities - and what counts as good or bad (to follow).

A key in healthcare is that 'the' problem is not ours.

It is 'ours' - if factors impose upon clinical decision making are a distraction 
- such as economics.

Identifying what the problem is - requires that we validate and integrate several sources of information: the referrer, the person - patient/client with the problem and what can be observed and investigated.

In healthcare again there is a need for co-production and Hodges' model can play a role in this. Sometimes the 'solution' may not be what is expected when a patient's choices are taken into account.  Hodges' model can work to the patient's strengths and the situation. The model can be used explicitly or implicitly to help assure the working out of the problems and the solution. A by-product of this is that we are prompted in consequence to ask questions and act on an individual's health and other literacies. What becomes evident given the challenges of productivity, demographics, public engagement is a gap in our understanding were co-production is concerned.

Myth #10: Innovation is Always Good

Berkun highlights how some innovations are not always good. H2cm may be challenging in terms of fears of 'runaway' reflection or navel-gazing. Could h2cm lend itself to a mechanistic response to problems. Is that a robot I can hear?

Could h2cm be a gift to those who wish to deskill the health and social workforce?

From models of care and theories of nursing to checklist A, B, C & D?

Use of the model on paper is one thing, but what of e-based forms of application? How can we assure accessibility to the model? Can we make an e-reflective workbench a reality for our students?

As noted in #9 the need for research to innovate in co-production, collaborative, person-centred care within developed and developing health care systems remains marked.

Scott Berkun (2007) The Myths of Innovation, CA: O'Reilly.

Friday, February 16, 2018

Common Sense..? c/o Santayana

individual
|
INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES
humanistic --------------------------------------- mechanistic
SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL
|
group

"Santayana departs from the British school, however, in insisting that a common sense philosophy cannot itself be adequately defended by common sense." p.63.

common sense
?
common sense
?

common sense
?


O'Sullivan, N. (1992) Santayana. St Albans: The Claridge Press.

Thursday, June 16, 2016

Threshold Concepts: Pre-conference Health and Social Care

Yesterday afternoon there was a video-linked workshop between Glasgow, Halifax, Nova Scotia - Dalhousie University and an interest group member in Plymouth. This was to try to further thinking on threshold concepts in healthcare and one of two pre-conference workshops at:

6TH BIENNIAL THRESHOLD CONCEPTS CONFERENCE


Our agenda:

Workshop: To disaggregate or not? The dilemma of complex threshold concepts
  • What do we mean by complex thresholds?
  • Is this particularly relevant to healthcare and if so how?
  • Can we identify some examples in health and social care?
  • What problems do complex thresholds bring for teachers, learners, the curriculum?
  • Is disaggregation helpful (and how) or unhelpful/reductionist/simplification?
  • Do we have any evidence or theories that can help us?
We did not cover all the points in depth, but in respect of the first point I could define 'complex thresholds' with recourse to Hodges' model. The paper I'm working on includes a table that alludes to this. I could take this question more literally in that draft.

Thinking about complexity and aggregation, by complex is this the same as compound? Compound suggests something that can be taken apart (it is composite), but complex involves the whole (domain-based?) situation / context?

The example I have in mind is learner's recognition, appreciation and understanding of:
  • mental capacity
  • best interest
  • deprivation of liberty
By learner's I am thinking of student nurses (plus other disciplines), healthcare assistants and future associate practitioners. In the era of lifelong learners, public engagement and patient involvement/engagement I have include others (despite the academic demands for specificity).

Philosophy Now 113
On the last question - Do we have any evidence or theories that can help us? - I still feel evidence can be found in Hodges' model. As ever: data, data, data!

Feelings are never enough (until they are all we are left with).

Discussion included the curriculum as the questions indicate, and again one of the original purposes for the model was in curriculum development. but in addition the position and role of the 'big picture'.

Issue 113 of Philosophy Now featured New Realism. I'm cherry picking from pragmatism, idealism and realism. New realism questions whether a unified picture (in philosophy) is available (p.7). While this is a damaging critique to Hodges' model, it might also be an opportunity.

Steinbauer, A. (2016). Interview: Markus Gabriel, Philosophy Now, Apr/May, 113; pp.6-10.