Here's one reply I had to reading Julie's post: The Secret By Denise Levertov
Two girls discover the secret of life in a sudden line of poetry. I who don't know the secret wrote the line. They told me (through a third person) they had found it but not what it was not even what line it was. No doubt by now, more than a week later, they have forgotten the secret, the line, the name of the poem. I love them for finding what I can't find, and for loving me for the line I wrote, and for forgetting it so that a thousand times, till death finds them, they may discover it again, in other lines in other happenings. And for wanting to know it, for assuming there is such a secret, yes, for that most of all. --- CHRIS CORRIGAN Consultation - Facilitation Open Space Technology Bowen Island, BC, Canada http://www.chriscorrigan.com [email protected] > -----Original Message----- > From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Julie > Smith > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 9:44 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: mental meanderings and self-organization > > Greetings ~ > > In my quest for a learning/education theory that resonates with my sense > of the world, I came across a book titled Education on the Edge of > Possibility by Renate Nummela Caine and Geoffrey Caine. There's a lot > to like about their learning theory. They talk about the implications > of chaos theory for educators, community-building, creating safe spaces, > and the like. > > One of the authors' focal points is recognition of the existence of and > power of self-organization and some thoughts about how to create the > conditions that support it. Unfortunately, they don't appear to know > anything about OST. I think their theory would be stronger with OST. > (But then, what wouldn't be? :)) > > The Caines make an argument about self-organization that is new to me. > After talking a bit about that BOIDS program (yes, the very same one > Chris invited us to take a look at many moons ago), they quote another > researcher who made this simple observation: > > Complex behavior, like flocking, need not have complex rules. > Simple rules will yield profoundly complex results. > > They go on to talk about how our basic beliefs create that web of simple > rules that will yield profoundly complex results. For example, they > identify three simple beliefs/rules that are imbedded in our educational > system: > > Only experts create knowledge. > Teachers deliver knowledge in the form of information. > Children are graded on how much of the information they have > stored. > > They hypothesize that the reason most educational reforms don't foster > much real change is because the underlying beliefs/rules aren't > changing. They posit the idea that self-organization is happening all > the time, AND that we naturally self-organize around those beliefs/rules > that we hold to be true. (This last part is new to me. Can't quite get > my mind completely around it. Don't know if I agree with it. Is that > what we mean by self-organization as we use the term here?) One example > is hierarchical beliefs self-organizing into hierarchical social > structures. Hence, they say, to deeply change the educational system, > we must begin by changing the basic underlying beliefs of educators: we > must change those simple rules/beliefs that educators self-organize > around. > > Aye, there's the rub. I'm wondering if people here agree with that. Do > we initiate the kind of change we desire by challenging another's model > of the world and attempting to replace it with our own, or do we simply > start with self-organization itself? Arghhh..... scratch that > question. Faulty on too many levels. > > So let me go here..... is it self-evident that self-organization itself > (as we know it through OST) frequently expands people's beliefs and > understandings and the rules they operate by? That by providing > open/safe/voluntary/equal space we're implicitly offering a new set of > rules and beliefs that can be approached and understood at the level and > pace each participant is prepared to comprehend? That the process > itself is the answer to the problems we pose? Or how about this: That > what matters is how we relate to each other, how we treat each other, > how we think of each other. That everything else, every problem we > think we have, is a vehicle for testing THESE questions. > > I keep asking questions I know the answer to..... so what is it? Just > some mental meanderings on a malingering Monday morning? Don't know. > There's still that unexpressed idea lingering at the edge of thought.... > how to participate politely and lightly in the bettering of it all..... > finding new layers of comfort in the process we're in..... easing into > and resting in the goodness and fullness of what we already know. > > Julie > > * > * > ========================================================== > [email protected] > ------------------------------ > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, > view the archives of [email protected], > Visit: > > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected], Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
