TEACHING EXCELLENCE DATABASE

Dendrilion stands under the light of a twofold metaphor. It points to its origin in the Greek “dendron”, standing for “tree”, and also “dendrites”, as ending parts of our branched neural cells. Accordingly, our goal was to present a branched, “neural” network of a selection of around 40 philosophical questions, categorized under different disciplines (see: Google drive link: Folder: Screenshots > File: Main Page), each under a separate card and one catchy, unrevealing name (Screenshots > Logic; Aesthetics; Metaphysics). Some questions are stand-alone, but some others are thematically connected to the ones in the same discipline, or even to those under another discipline. This creates a truthful and dynamic representation of the real and most frequent connectedness of these questions. It parallelly helps develop the participant’s thought, and upon their answers reveals potential outcomes with each new step in the thinking process. However, the app itself bears limited significance without a live, real-time conversationist to guide you and help you on your philosophical journey. With that said, our overall attempt was twofold: to bring philosophy closer to the public, and to engage our own students as the main presenters, helping them brush their dialogue, narrative, and explanation skills, as well as affirm their professional knowledge. This combination of digital and visual aspects on the one hand, and a live dialogue on the other, has proven to be a fruitful form of bridging the gap between the “hard philosophy” and public, at the same time demonstrating what philosophers do and why that is important in the broader frame of our decision-making. This association of both digital and analogue approaches remains simple in its core. Its innovation is in the calibration of the two as presented, and that is what yields positive results, engaging both students, and the highly varied population we encountered so far. Therefore, in sum, it is correct to say Dendrilion represents a platform for a guided discussion development, where both the presenter and another participant have a chance for complementary gain: the former to practice and adjust their guidance through philosophical knowledge according to the person in front of them, and the latter to open up discussing intricate, interesting, and important questions with a professional, and eventually see how they fit in the life of an active citizen.

Methodology

academia. The shared belief of the Philosophy Department in Niš is that philosophy should be regarded in an anti-elitist way, being available for both professional studying and as a tool which should, with the other humanistic disciplines, contribute actively to better citizenship, such that consequently ameliorates different aspects of society. From that point of view, the idea was to provide an interactive and dynamic environment in which participants can themselves sense a connectedness of topics which sound more or less theoretical, but actually have many sublevels which, through a guided conversation, are shown in their involvement with many different questions we encounter in our lives. - The idea was quickly settled to encompass questions categorized under the most prominent philosophical disciplines. - Another step was to carefully choose and formulate questions, where everyone of the philosophical side of the team devised those according to their expertise. - After that, the meetings in which we discussed the best interconnectedness of these questions were one of the crucial points for setting and making clear the network we were to provide. - Choosing a digital setting comes from three main reasons: 1) Digital setting can follow the speed of thought and conversation; 2) The scheme of questions can be more fluid for both interlocutors and the makers of this tree; 3) Particular aesthetics (which we on purpose chose to be and abstract, treeish construction floating in space, with only lightly-hinting question titles) helps displace the viewer into the positive unknown, breaking the prejudices often arising, linking “philosophy” and it being “hard”. - We were very lucky to have an IT engineer among our friends who was willing to pro bono and after the regular working hours make such an application. He is listed under the participants here, not only due to the fact that he substantially contributed, but also because we are grateful he decided to do so due to the recognition of the need for a novelty in educational tools. The structure of the application is as follows: • Questions are divided by disciplines. • There are: a) stand-alone and b) interconnected questions. (See: Screenshots > Stand-alone Q: Connection 1; Connection 2; Connection 3; Connection 4) • b) The beginning question is regarded as a “Top-tier question”. That is the main question, whether it remains a stand-alone, or connects to something else, and it is the broadest in the potential scope, while low-tier is the most specific. Any interconnected question can have something or all from the following hierarchy (one of or any combination of what follows): 1) Derived from top-tier; 2) Mid-tier; 3) Low-tier question. o “Derived from top-tier” means the original question splits to two or more questions of identical value (See pdf and png files “Proof of concept” for a demonstration of one potential connection between questions) o “Mid-tier” means a follow-up question connected thematically (horizontally) to the top-tier, or derived one. o “Low-tier” can follow either straight from top-, mid-tier, or a derived one, and is a consequence following directly from the previous question. Important note: On the screenshots presented you will see an icon next to each question. You are viewing the app in the developer’s mode, which is not visible to the participant. That means that developer’s mode gives you access to the graph function under which you can see the actual connection of these levels (tiers) of questions, upon clicking each question separately. This function is very useful for both developers and presenters, because it shows clearly the network and helps you test again through time and experience gained if something is to be changed. The connection itself also helps you revise on your teaching skills, because they are the crucial component which presents the “question flow” in the live conversation, while on the screen, you see that as just one white-blue line. - After the app was set, we tested it first by ourselves (developer and professors). Then the testing was done with the students who expressed the wish to participate in this project as an extracurricular activity. We focused on the 3rd, 4th years of BA studies, and MA students. This is due to the level of knowledge in both professional and soft skills that are required for such an endeavour. The main corrections needed in the app itself were then done accordingly before the first public presentation. Students’ feedback and contributions were much appreciated here, and this at the same time presented one example of a prolific collaboration between professors and students. - Most of the time we have both professors and students at presentations, both due to the practical and quality-insurance reasons, such are: the number of people expected and thus more presenters needed, different energy levels and approaches that combine well if both are present, helping in when one side cannot think through at the particular moment. Having knowledge in the field, being creative and methodically set to lead the conversation in a fruitful direction are the most important aspects and the key of our overall project. The beauty of it is having the ability to predict many possible turnouts, and yet always have a somewhat or entirely new scenario with each different person, or a group of people approaching you. This is the replay value of the project, from which the overall universality stems, reflecting further through sustainability, internationalization, inclusion.

Tools, equipment, technology used

The application itself was developed in the game engine “Unity”. The design of the logo, leaves, branches, and question cards was done in the Adobe Illustrator and Adobe Photoshop. However, this is not the only engine one can use. It can be done in the other ones, depending on your developing skills and access. The main equipment for presentation needed is a computer, whether a PC or a laptop, although a laptop is more convenient if you are going to different places. Additionally, we suggest you have a decent mouse, as it is much smoother to navigate and avoid unnecessary clicks. If you have a larger audience, or you expect not to have enough time for each person present to have a conversation with you, it is advisable to have access to the projector, so you can allow at least for a passive involvement for those who won’t have the time, or are simply shy and would not want to participate directly. Apart from that, we decided to have a small “reward” for our audience, whether they participated directly or not. We printed stickers with Dendrilion logo, and prepared the list with different articles, texts, and videos for each discipline, each packed under a separate QR code, which at the end of the conversation we distribute to everyone. (See files “QR_1_1 & 2_1” in the folder, and please bear in mind that not all links are in English, as everything was, at the time being, primarily made for Serbian audience.)

Outcomes and outputs, main results

The main outputs are: an original in-house department project. From its structure follows it is suitable for presentation on science fairs, workshops, one-on-one, interdepartmentally. Another also comes as a tool for the students of philosophy to practice their teaching skills. The most measurable outcomes are those pertaining to the new insights and understanding your interlocutor’s gain. Although a conversation is a live and procedural occurrence, the bigger the novelty is for the participant, the more visible it is. Whether it is just a new information, or a surprise after a certain realization occurs, this is something that in most of the cases can be recognized on the spot. Other outcomes concern the curiosity about the app itself, how it was made, and if it is useful for other areas of expertise. Combining these two main outcomes, we can safely summarize that the most far-reaching outcomes we know of so far are: some new students who turned out decided to study philosophy because it was presented to them in an interesting and creative way, but also with a dose of seriousness; other academic staff from the faculties, from Serbia and the region, who invited us to present it at their institutions; NGOs which asked us to come and present the app and discuss potential for collaboration; recognition by other colleagues from our Department and Faculty; recognition by our own students; a useful extracurricular tool for our students; and, as a crown, and our initial motivation, recognition by laymen for which this tool was originally designed, with as much flexibility for adjustment as possible. (See Folder: On the Science fair)

Lessons learnt

- Although we were somewhat skeptical of the overall aesthetics of our project, it proved to do what we intended, namely, attract participants to approach and engage, preventing hesitancy towards philosophy. And like a “good Socrates”, your good verbal introduction about what that is helps turn the curiosity on the faces in front of the screen to the favourable side. - Mutual feedback and summing up experience after each presentation is highly recommended for fine-tuning of your future presentations. - Diverse audience. Since the app is adaptable, inclusive and universal in its mechanism, plus the factor of our own approach, diversity of audience is both a blessing and a curse. Due to the practical reasons, you cannot afford to change the questions so frequently, so it is advisable to have a set goal of who your main target group is, and what you want to achieve. Then you will have the time for the main fine-tuning in the app you need, and for the rest you can adapt on the spot. -The most popular disciplines in the app were without a doubt Logic, Ethics, and Political Philosophy, in this order. This usually comes out of either comfort zones, or a need not to be ashamed, or a need to engage with something that sounds not too abstract. The good thing is the question titles are only mildly suggestive, so they don’t actually know what to expect. People choosing these disciplines because they also have a need for a more practical, “tangible” value stand for a chance for philosophy to shine. It is, ironically, often criticized for the detachment from reality, however, both these more practical, and completely theoretical disciplines have indeed their value for every individual, and will at least help you put into motion a more intricate thinking process. On the top of it all, this is where the value of the network existing between the questions really came to prominence, because it is highly likely one will choose at least one question with a mid- or low-tier one following from it, and would want to see what’s behind it, which will probably lead to another discipline. - As our main target group were high schoolers, these are the questions they lively ask themselves in some form, regardless of whether they had philosophy as a subject or not, so you can help them develop that inquiry. With the seniors, an interesting phenomenon is that their initial reaction is to either get scared, or get completely immersed and do not want to stop choosing questions, because, as they usually say, it makes them feel younger. The satisfaction and goal achievement are to manage to address both groups.

Adaptability and sustainability of the best practice (for other institutions)

The core and structure of this app are highly adaptable for most any practice and discipline. The main tool needed for that is the technical knowledge to insert the necessary changes for your purposes. Also, the content and branching are, expectedly, entirely up to your needs. The entire surrounding can also be chosen. However, the leaves and branches, as well as the buttons standing for questions are of our own design and tailoring, so you would either have to design that yourself or ask someone competent do it, if you prefer to insert more than just textual changes. The good thing is these require basic skills in graphic design, so it is something you don’t necessarily need professional help with. Where we highly recommend to have a professional by your side is in the field of the programming itself.

Promotion of best practice

As mentioned so far, our target group were primarily high schoolers, and for four main reasons: 1) Sometimes philosophy is taught poorly or in a boring way in high schools. This is bad for many reasons, especially if we hold philosophy in a high enough regard to claim it can help us polish our reasoning skills in order to make better decisions that affect us on both individual and collective levels. 2) Many students don’t have philosophy at all in secondary education. This is becoming a national problem, and it doesn’t only affect philosophy, but also other humanistic and social science disciplines, like sociology or psychology. 3) High schoolers are at that excellent age when they are still young enough for positive influence, they have enough knowledge and curiosity to think about many different questions and issues. 4) High schoolers are also potential future students of philosophy. We participated at: science fairs, particular high schools, workshops for smaller groups of young adults, Open Doors events at our faculty when high schoolers can come and introduce themselves with how faculties work, and more specifically, ask anything they want to know about a particular study program.

Scope and impact

• Course/department level
• Faculty level
• Institutional level
• Cross-institutional level
• National level
• EU/EHEA/International level

As explained so far, this project is in line with departmental beliefs regarding the place of philosophy in the public space, and with the promotional scope and goals of the faculty and university. Additionally, one of the main reasons this project needed to be made is the unfavourable position humanistic disciplines, social sciences, and arts are in, in our country for some time. Therefore, we believe we are closer to the EU/EHEA goals than the national ones at the moment. Cross-institutional level is only partially fulfilled due to the need for further promotion, so through competitions as this one and other activities, we strive to promote our practice.

6.1 Digitalization

• Outstanding, innovative, excellent practices of online / blended / hybrid learning
• Innovative, novel methodology in using digital tools/devices in teaching
• Innovative use of digital administration tools
• Novel digital solutions (tools, frameworks, devices, tasks to enhance efficiency and motivation)

Reasoning: A novel use of the existing digital tools, such as game engines and graphic design tools, in order to create an innovative framework which, combined with the dialogue-related and dialectical skills, yields more approachable and overall good learning results of a traditionally intricate matter.

---

6.2 Internationalization

• Innovative practices of blended mobility
• Students engagement in international projects
• Courses offered to international multicultural students both online and offline

Reasoning: As long as the content is localized (translated) into English, or a language of a particular nation, the internalization criterion is fulfilled. Philosophy as such is for all, and the way it is presented is the key. Therefore, this project can be easily adapted for a much wider audience, it is communicable in language and idea, and it can be presented online or offline, although the latter is preferred.

---

6.3 Inclusion and diversity, universal design

• Inclusive course design, universally designed divers activities to meet special students' needs
• Universally designed teaching material - adjustable for special needs
• Innovative teaching methodology for inclusion and meet diverse student needs
• Senzitivizing students to consider special needs when practicing their profession
• Course includes hints on how the services/products of the profession could be universally designed/inclusive

Reasoning: We wrote about aspects of inclusion and the universality at length in previous questions, so here we will only sum: we recommend primarily the secondary school age and older, but the overall approach which accents the importance of dialogue skills is sensitive to many different groups of people that can approach you. In our case, as a special-case group we had a few children (4 y/o). If someone wishes to tailor the app for specific special needs, there is enough room to do so.

---

6.4 Sustainability

• Teaching material contains profession related sustainability aspects
• Special courses reflecting to UN 2030 Sustainability goals, Green Deal - mini-courses, microcredentials
• Social entrepreneurship projects, service-learning in the topic

Reasoning: The project responds to the criteria of innovation, digitalization, equality, quality education, accessibility, building a strong institution of philosophy outside of the official institutions, and it aims to form a larger network of those who can share and contribute to developing further this good practice. Therefore, it broadly addresses the sustainability of education. Also, it serves the public by promoting with the concrete example the tacit need for philosophical education.

3.3 Public contact datas

Name	Email address	Website
Department of Philosophy	dep.fil.nis@gmail.com