Balanced Books Joel Osteen 2016 Watch this!

Merry Christmas and I do mean Christmas

I know we have heard the phrase "put Christ in Christmas." For many of us that simply means to acknowledge a religious connection and minimize the Sante Clause stuff.

What does it really mean to pull out a few quarters in your pocket and drop them in the red kettle, or better yet put them in the cup of that person who walks thru traffic?

What does it mean to have Christ in our life? A simple person, born in a simple stable. We traditionally take out manger scenes and arrange statues indoor and out to represent the manger. Could you live in a manger? What about the person in the park that still has a tent up in this weather?

When was the last time you looked deeply into the eyes of the guy on the ground shaking his cup outside the 7-Eleven?

This Christmas, say Merry Christmas, because it is a holy day. Say Merry Christmas and have mercy on the homeless, the beggars, and the downtrodden.

Have mercy on them.

Dewey, Kotter and Campbell on Democracy, Education and Change

I recently upgraded to Windows 10 and incurred plenty of change. I also encountered more applications that would not work with the newly upgraded Windows 10 and the "Edge." What is it about change that works? I began to ponder change in education.

Learning is change. In my graduate studies in education we had to take a course in change management. At the time, I was not connecting the liberal learning seminar to my studies on theories of education. However, since my education was so engaging, I actually retained something in the back of my mind.  The first part of this equation of learning was influenced by John Dewey.

When it came to learning, Dewey is my "leader of learning." I just ate up all that experiential learning and using activity to engage students. I love all of his theories of learning.  There was that one issue about democracy in education that did not seem to synthesize at the time.

Dewey had beliefs in education and reform. I was not paying attention at the time and the words education reform and my organizational change management seminar never crossed paths in my brain. Until now.  Dewey's words now jump off the page 

"I believe that all reforms which rest simply upon the enactment of law, or the threatening of certain penalties, or upon changes in mechanical or outward arrangements, are transitory and futile." 

Did Dewey mean that reforms will fail that are forced upon educators? I think Dewey clarifies himself in another of his stated beliefs 

"I believe that the individual who is to be educated is a social individual and that society is an organic union of individuals. If we eliminate the social factor from the child we are left only with an abstraction; if we eliminate the individual factor from society, we are left only with an inert and lifeless mass."

I wonder are we loosing track of the social individual during education reform? Can we continue down this path of educating students to get  a robotic job, or the work of the day, and eliminate these social factors? Dewey does not seem to think so. 

"I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living."

Learning is change. Let me tackle the change portion of this equation, and my learning in the course on organizational change management. We studied John Kotter and his book Leading Change.

In class, we threw around saying like "Culture eats strategy for lunch" with reckless abandon. We memorized the models of proven organizational change management from Lewin's three-step process and Kotter's eight-step process, to Bullock and Batten known for planned change, Neckhard and Harris for a change model formula, and Nadler and Tushman for congruence model. Of course we studied the scholarly works from Harvard University and MIT on how to institute successful organization change. Communication of the vision and buy in from all the actors seemed to be the overarching theme of successful change.  

None of the books addressed the Miegs Field model of change management. Perhaps it was still to early in the life of this new model. The model that keeps change top secret until the moment it happens, does not allow voices to be heard because they just drag out the process, and a system that thinks they know what is best for the society. Miegs Field did enact change overnight in a most undemocratic manner.  If you asked people today if they think it a good idea to tear down Northerly Island in favor of a few private pilots to build a landing strip, then you would hear the protests.

With the exception of Miegs Field, successful change involves communication. Kotter even addresses the predominating political organization when he asserts: 

"Organizations of the future will have to value candid discussion far more than they do today. Norms associated with political polite –ism,  with non-conformational diplomaticese, and with killing-the-messenger-of-bad-news  will have to change.  The volume knob of the dishonest dialog channel will have to be turned down."   

 

Organizations with communication dysfunctions must find a way to communicate to effect real change. 

Learning is change. Hopefully, I can come back full circle to Dewey and synthesize with Kotter. If educators embody the same beliefs as Dewey, and there is a functional communication system, then the open communication of education reform can produce a successful organization change. Without a voice from Dewey influencing the reform, it is as he said "transitory and futile."

So when it looks like east-is-east-and-west-is-west and never-the-twain-shall-meet, then the time is now to read the other textbook from my graduate organization change seminar:

I can-----I will

Lately life has become a delicate negotiation of "I can" and "I will." Last month I had arthroscopic surgery on my knee. Of course the superhuman athlete in me want to jump up and ride my bike on a hundred mile fall  Apple Cider Century bicycle ride. I have these goals. Bucket lists of sorts. I will ride a century bike ride this fall. This goal now must be negotiated with the "Can I?" This month the negotiation seems to stop at about a hour on the stationary cycle. Nowhere near a good days ride in a century where you start at the crack of dawn. Slowly wind your way thru a morning fog misting on your glasses, stop and have bananas and coffee.  Ride some more and then break for a lunch as you watch riders come and go, wax and wane, till you roll past the countryside in bliss. That "I will" will have to wait, for now it is one hour of Al Roker on my living room bike. My cat bats the turning wheel thinking the logo is a new cat toy.

"I can" has some physical limitations right now. It is not going to be that way for long because the "I will" is still trying to negotiate a better deal. As long as that is happening, I think I am good.

As I get older everyday is becoming a bargain between I can make it to yoga this morning despite the stiffness. I will master the yoga positions and I will graduate to the Continuing yoga class.  So I was wondering, why do I have to set a goal to graduate to the next class. Why can't I master yoga in the Beginners class? Do I want to go to Continuing Yoga just because it's there? Long term goals in yoga can take decades. To get a good tree pose, table pose or worse frog stand may take decades. This morning I am bargaining with my stiff tendons for the ability to get to class by 9:30am. I am bribed by a good cup of coffee and some warm blanket around my ankles. The negotiation takes on another dimension - I can break out of the comfort zone and work on yoga because I will graduate one day.

One thing that seems to lack any bargaining is walking the dog. Inuki has her way all the time. I will walk the dog because I can.




I will ride a century because I can. Later.


-Terri

"Who Moved My Cheese' and Other Thoughts on Change

We had to read a book in Graduate School called Who Moved My Cheese: An Amazing Way to Deal with Change in Your Work and in Your Life. 

It is standard reading for business students, but I read it in my Educating Adults master program. It is a allegory for change. If I can recap a quick, Wikipedia version, interpretation of the story, it goes like this:

There are two mice, Sniff and Scurry and two mini peoples, Hem and Haw. They live and work in a maze that is overseen by corporate heads way above them that they cannot see or communicate with. The point of being in the maze is to get your cheese. The mini people and the mice find the cheese and establish routines around the cheese. The mini people become arrogant about the stash of cheese they are working on and they become lazy. The mice, Sniff and Scurry, are always noticing things, warning signs, and sniffing the cheese to see if it is getting old.

 

One day they come to the maze and there is no cheese. Scurry goes off hunting for new cheese, as he had read the warning signs. Sniff is not far behind him. Hem and Haw return to the same station and continue to find no cheese. They complain about the unfairness. Hem finally goes out looking for new cheese, but Haw remains in the victimized mindset. Haw remains hoping for change.

 

Meanwhile Sniff and Scurry have found a new cheese station and it has new flavors of cheese. The two of them quickly adapt to the new flavor of cheese.

 

Hem begins to laugh at his situation and posts on the wall a message he hope Haw will see: "If you don't change you become extinct."

 

Haw finds new cheese and learns to smell the cheese to see if it getting to a point where change will take the cheese away. Haw learns to adapt quickly and writes on the wall "the sooner you move off old cheese the sooner you will enjoy new cheese."

 

 

 

So the answer is not a simple as find another maze to go work in. It's not about finding another job. The lesson from Sniff and Scurry is to become life long learners and always be ready to accommodate new learning and new situations. It is about being less arrogant and listening to new people and people that are different. When they let you know it's time to change, find a way to change. The corporate maze keeper will always want to try new flavors of cheese, will always want to make some type of change, just to keep the day filled with activities. It's true there is no concern for what is going on in the maze and what the mice are going through.

 

 

Once upon a time, I was brought into a maze that had some arrogant mini-people with some very old stinky cheese. I knew I was a lifelong learner and hoped to show the old mini-people new ways. I hoped to illustrate to them the writing on the walls, that I read when I saw the corporate headquarters change. I think I was brought into the maze along with a bunch of other new mice to see if we could change the mini-people into new way of thinking.

 

 It sadly did not work out. The old mini-people pushed the new mice around, bullying and brazenly using arrogance to intimidate the new mice. If any of the new mice spoke up against the treatment, they were cast away as outsiders who could not play well with others. The once upon a time story has no happy ending. All the mini-people will be put in one small maze and they will battle it out in a bloody fashion. Being one of the new mice, lifelong learning has never stopped for me.  This mouse was sniffing the cheese and reading the walls a long time ago.

 

T.

 

Orchestrating Learning and a few of my favorite metaphors

I always thought this picture of an orchestral conductor was the perfect metaphor for what I want to do when I teach. Don't make the music yet signal the music, control the cadence, let  each play their own piece, yet play in harmony with each other.

Much has been said about being a facilitator of learning. Stand aside and let the students explore and experience learning. Stop talking and let the learners engage in discussions.

Facilitating learning can be standing on the sidelines like a coach observing and offering expert advice when needed.

 

Learning takes place in informal settings, while students are chattering. Higher cognitive work takes place as learners synthesize knowledge and ideas under informal circumstances. Submerged below the surface it is often difficult to measure informal learning.

Orchestrating learning:1. to compose or arrange (learning) for performance by a classroom full of learners 

2. to arrange or manipulate, especially by means of clever or thorough planning or maneuvering, a collaborative, experiential, problem-based, constructivist learning environment.

 

School starts Monday, August 24, 2015

 



  

Can we just get along?

 

I love it when I see a simple model that does so much to organize thoughts around extremely complex problems. This model represents a conflict resolution.  It goes like this:

In the far right hand upper square of Our Way we have a good state of people getting along. They are assertive. Assertive means you have permission to use your knowledge. You have the power to feel comfortable being assertive. You self esteem is good and you know your stuff. You are also concerned for the other party in your environment. They care about what you are doing and you care about what happens to them. In short you are cooperating and collaborating in what ever project you are doing. It is truly the sweet spot of where we want to be.

The other three squares are problem areas which have conflicts to be resolved.

Lets take avoidance, or the No Way square. How many times have we seen this? One party is overly assertive and does not have concern for the other party. The other party has no power to speak up or little self esteem to bring up contrary opinions, nor can they assert themselves. So the No Way party will nod heads and smile and say sure I'll do that. Then never do it and avoid the conflict. There is no cooperation, care or concern that failure will occur. This is the most difficult square to get people to move into the Our Way square. They have two factors to move.

Now let's move to the Your Way.  One of the parties lacks power to be assertive and cannot voice opinions. Some how the weaker party still thinks the other is concerned for their well being and will do what they want. They accommodate the assertive opposing party and have a partial cooperation. Feedback from the lower assertive party never makes it up to the top. As a matter of fact they may even withhold valuable feedback.  It plays out in real life when one party knows something will not work, but goes along with You Way only to stand by and watch it fail. This square is dangerous until the assertive party acknowledges the other has valuable knowledge to consider and provides recognition. That improves self esteem and the parties move toward the Our Way Square.

The last square is My Way. As the title suggests one party is powerful and assertive with no concern or care for the other party. It is truly my way or the highway. This square hands out orders and unilateral commands. It disregards the other parties knowledge and power to communicate their concerns. However the other party is capable of being assertive as well. This is where sparks really fly. Two parties capable of speaking up and asserting them selves in the conflict. However both parties have no concern for the well being of the other. Sounds like divorce doesn't it? Usually in My Way the leading party will win and get their way. To resolve this conflict (other than divorce) the two parties must begin to care about the concerns of each other. Once concerns can be negotiated, the parties can move toward Our Way.

Sometimes we never totally move to the Our Way square and conflicts settle in to compromise. There remains non optimum concern for each other and there remains problems with assertiveness and self esteem. All the parties in the conflict do not want to budge on sharing knowledge or information that would totally resolve conflicts. So the parties never move to the Our Way square.

Our Way is the optimum sweet spot. How do you resolve your conflicts? How are you moving your positions to Our Way?