Meme: Passion Quilt

Angela Maiers tagged me in her second round of the Passion Quilt Meme. I took this picture last year as I was growing a lot of new grass from seed and taking great satisfaction with the results. It's a picture of what I am most passionate about kids learning: growing from seed.

Every question is a seed for some significant learning that grows with the more we know. A spark of imagination functions like a seed that blossoms as we explore an initial possibility into other forms, uses and realizations. Every new skill we acquire is a seed of growth that takes off into new results, accomplishments and satisfactions.

Like the parable of the seed, the initial impulse may realize no growth if it falls on the hard ground or gets trampled underfoot of critics and control freaks. The seed can sprout up too quickly in places that do not support rooting into the depth of personal connections and purposes. The growth can get entangled in thorny issues that miss the big picture while debating small details. Or happily, the seed can fall where it grows slowly and fruitfully.

Growing PLEs from seed

Yesterday Patrick Higgins posed a wonderful question to me that has spawned a barrage of reflective insights this morning (thanks Patrick!):

My idea is to surround them (the students) with a network, much like how you have described PLE's, that will give them access to information, allow them to create content on the fly, and truly give them the freedom to pursue what interests them by making meaningful connections. My question to you is, how does this process start?

PLE's propagate from seed. PLE's cannot be successfully manufactured or constructed. They are organic by nature and need to be nurtured with attentive care. The growing conditions vary so dramatically that success is an adaptation to the particular context, not compliance with rules or recipes. Giving students the picture of "gardening their PLE" will help them to understand the complex challenge, to avoid trying too hard or not enough, and to recognize self-inflicted problems.

PLE's require balance to grow. PLE's are a vibrant combination of frameworks and freedoms. The structure of Web 2.0 tools and connectivity provides space to move about freely. Neither the freedom or the framework is a enough on it's own. They are like plants that die from excessive sun or insufficient water or vice versa. Too much and too little of either freedoms or frameworks proves lethal to the PLE. Other names for PLE's that capture this synergy include: "independently networked learning", "autonomous social learning" and "self-inspired immersion in others' learning".

PLE's blossom after other growth stages. PLE's take root in a soil of personal passions, motivations and interests. When a PLE is grounded in these personal feelings, it can take off and flourish. When PLE's try to sprout in the muck of class requirements or imposed expectations, they whither and die off. The urge of learn more, connect more, see more, explore more -- comes from within the sprouting seed. The growth is "self propelled" and cannot be controlled. Blossoming follows cycling through processes repeatedly. The growth is energizing, satisfying and developmental.

PLE's are contagious:  Learning to be curious, courageous, reflective and passionate comes from others exhibiting those qualities in our presence. We catch on to PLE's like fads and viruses, by immersing ourselves in the processes of other successful learners. We benefit from what they are finding through their PLE that they can, in turn, give to us and strengthen our PLE. We "come down with" the propagation of mutual benefit, reciprocities and emergent solutions.

It takes a PLE to grow another's PLE. When the others are obviously learning about OUR OWN exploratory processes, experimenting with affecting OUR learning outcomes, and nurturing OUR development in desired directions - our growth takes off. Their PLE's nurture the development of our PLE's. Together we realize what works, what interferes with results and what makes a bigger difference than something else.

Devoted to unthinkable danger

We may be thinking that professional development is a good idea. We may give it lip service as if it's our best intention to become more capable and resourceful. We may even try to pursue personal advancements and find we cannot stick with the effort. On some other level, we seem to be avoiding professional development with a vengeance.

Whenever we sabotage our best intentions, our logical thinking is disconnected from our routine conduct and feelings. What we are doing to ourselves is unthinkable. We cannot act rationally because the underlying dynamics are irrational and unconscious. We discover we cannot stop the behavior, change our feelings or break the habitual reaction.

It helps to use a map to picture the situation in our conflicted minds. At some point in our experience, we discover we are in some real danger. Professionally, this might be the danger of getting:

• blamed for a problem
• guilt-tripped for what we neglected
• put down for a lack of concern
• accused of being irresponsible
• mocked for a lack of ambition
• scorned for falling short of expectations

These dangers are not controllable. Our logical resources for rationally responding to manageable issues -- cannot handle this kind of trouble. We are faced with unthinkable dangers. We become traumatized from the experience of this danger occurring. We dread it happening again. Anytime we sense that a reoccurrence is brewing, we will be overcome with vague anxieties and specific apprehensions. Our minds will legitimize these feelings with confirmation of the unthinkable danger. We will then have the urge to do what worked before and avoid further trouble.

In this context of unthinkable dangers, professional development is asking for trouble and needs to be avoided at all cost. Learning how to perform better in our jobs could be taken by others as an admission of guilt, acceptance of blame or submission to their hostility. We would invite more of the unthinkable dangers we're trying desperately to avoid.

We discover ways to survive in these dangerous situations. We find out that people back off and leave us alone if we are:

• already over-committed, over-extended, swamped with duties
• clearly a martyr, giving one's all and getting nothing back
• curtailed by imposed limitations, prevented from doing a better job
• on the brink of burnout, reduced to a programmed robot
• one of the crowd, thinking like the others, equally hostile
• rejected for caring so much about the students or outcomes

These are defensive maneuvers, a flight response, an avoidance strategy. They are predicated on the perception of uncontrollable danger, like a "deer in headlights", frozen with terror. They only leave one other option: go on the offensive, fight for a change, be equally dangerous to others. That option embroils everyone in office politics, mutual contempt and a swamp of chronic problems. All the solutions are short sighted and make the danger worse.

Seeing all this is not logical thinking. It takes a kind of reflective practice that includes the unthinkable and irrational components of our cognition. My next post will explore a effective resolution of arrested development from unthinkable dangers.

Technorati tags: arrested development, irrationality, comfort zone

Arrested development mapped out

Previously I've explored seven possible explanations for classroom teachers avoiding professional development. I've also considered how the "appearance of avoidance" could be misleading if the teachers are getting transformed by giving to their students. It's also possible there is no problem if their minds are closed in a state of flow and unconscious competence. Here I'll explore a psychological component of real professional stagnation and burnout: arrested development.

When we pause from our activities to explore our minds, we find there is a large terrain of thinkable thoughts within us. We observe that we can "go there", "think that through" or "explore that possibility in some depth". Within this familiar territory, we are rational and logical. We make sense to others if we share our thoughts from this region. We have confidence in these thoughts which allows us to think them through calmly and clearly. We are effective, reflective practitioners.

Beyond this realm, we become agitated when we go there. We've had experiences with this thinking getting us into the trouble we were trying to avoid. Our thoughts are frantic, unsettled and unclear. We obviously lack confidence in these lines of reasoning and dread going into these regions. We don't make sense when we blurt these thoughts out to others. We appear irrational, desperate and defensive. We go there when our hot button gets pushed, our identity gets threatened or a hidden self-betrayal gets exposed by others. We feel possessed, out of control and dangerous to ourselves.

We can also go "off the map" in our minds -- into a region of unthinkable thoughts. When we go beyond our irrational thoughts, we go blank. We are in the dark, lost or bewildered. We're speechless if we try to say what we're thinking. We've entered the realm of our emotional baggage. We have moved onto undifferentiated ground. We cannot think our way through this region because it embodies no distinctions to think with.

Arrested development is the result of living with this condition. We find our thinkable thoughts are surrounded by irrational impulses and a blank region beyond that. We choose to play it safe and stay within the familiar region of reliable, thinkable thoughts. Myths and fairy tales begin here. Nemo is hanging out with his Dad. Frodo is staying in the Shire. Harry Potter is enduring the Dursleys. If the protagonists suffered from arrested development, their story would end here. No venturing into unknowns, no leaving the comfort zone, no exploring the dangerous void. (to be continued...)

Technorati tags: arrested development, irrationality, comfort zone

After the frontier settlements

When a barren terrain shows the first signs of organic growth, weed species have taken hold. Other grasses and flowering ground covers will unsuccessfully attempt to take root. The new species die off until the weeds have been through more generations of composting to provide enough top soil for new species to grow. The weeds then attempt to choke out the growth of invading species which are less hardy and drought tolerant. The more robust the weeds are, the thicker the topsoil becomes for the invaders. Eventually the growing conditions are "too good" for the weeds and the grasses and ground covers win out.

When an unsettled region shows the first signs of civilization, trappers, cowboys and criminals are on the prowl. Attempts to establish safe homesteads and quiet villages falls prey to the outlaws. Forts, saloons and whorehouses then provide a stable environment for the footloose ruffians. When polite society tries to set up shop and homesteads, the sociopaths continue to terrorize the settlers. The more successful the deviants are, the sooner they become their own worst enemies. Sidewalks, banks and schools become established in their wake.

When an industrialized economy shows the first signs of pervasive connectivity, web presence has taken hold. Other gift economies and support systems will attempt unsuccessfully to supplement the ecommerce foothold. Cyber citizens will be terrorized by:

• scam websites and hacker code redirects from valid web pages
• spam emails, blog comments, so-net invitations and wiki entries
• viruses, spyware and poison cookies
• phishing, identity theft and corrupted passwords
• flame wars, ganker attacks and griefer snark
• porn, online predators and sexual bait
• digital piracy, violations of IP rights
  

The more successful the dark side of ecommerce becomes, the sooner it will become its own worst enemy. Planetary learning, healing and transforming will take hold.

Technorati tags: frontier, pioneer, Wild West

Catalogues networks and ecologies

At the turn of the previous century, catalogues became a big breakthrough. Retailers distributed mail-order catalogues that listed everything they sold. Libraries maintained card catalogues of every book they housed. Colleges published course catalogues of every class they offered. The information glut of one hundred years ago was handled by indexes, categories, cross references and identification numbers. We were keeping track of things. Content was the main thing. Formal instruction and content delivery were in tune with the times.

The advent of the Internet made networks the next big breakthrough. Retailers created e-commerce web sites that delivered unique search results and recommendations. Libraries digitized their catalogues to enable searches by subject, keyword and adjacent books on the shelf. Colleges put their course schedules on the web to automate enrollment, wait listing and monitoring of fulfilled prerequisites. The information glut of the nineties was handled by tagged data, large data arrays and search algorithms. "Added connections between nodes of content" was the main thing. Informal learning and conversations were in tune with the times.

It's already time for the next big breakthrough. Generation Y has begun to graduate from schools and enter the workforce. The generation gap experienced by Gen X with Gen Y at home and in school -- will now invade the economic engines and cultural infrastructure. The meaning of the words: "network" and "ecology" will change.

When most people speak of ecology currently, they refer to a combination of nodes. "Ecology" and "network" are nearly synonymous. They are addressing the change from working in isolation to including partners and alliances. As Dave Pollard wrote recently:

A network is actually a fabrication of knots (nodes) designed to trap, rather than connect. Our use of the term to describe n-to-n connectedness of a group of people through multiple degrees of separation is novel, I suspect because such connection does not occur in nature.

Thinking of ecologies as nodes maintains the imagery of "content with added connections". It justifies large corporations with weakened governments beholden to their commercial interests. It perpetuates institutions for textbook education and surgical/pharmaceutical health care. It misses out on the value of ecologies as the next big breakthrough.

Ecologies fill in gaps with growth. Ecologies replace obsolete growth in stages. Ecologies restore balance disrupted by extreme growth. Ecologies grow innovative solutions to problems created by replication. Ecologies thrive on emergent outcomes of highly interdependent invasions, changes and reversals. Ecologies do not manufacture goods, fail to recycle waste products, or stockpile inventories. Content is incidental, disposable and recyclable. Connections is everything.

Because its not here yet, this change is unthinkable. The early signs are "off radar" and seemingly ludicrous. The best way I've thought to picture the next breakthrough so far is "a network with no nodes". In lieu of things that get connected, imagine highly interdependent voids. Instead of linking capable resources, picture joining together "gaps". Rather than tagging content by how it will be used, appreciate the central importance of unknowns, mysteries and unanswered questions.

Technorati tags: ecologies, networks, content developers

Underlying relationship problems

Last week, two Colorado entrepreneurs asked me to develop a business model that would utilize their talents (and my own). I've been immersed in the design process and enjoying it immensely. One of the design themes that emerged is the following:

Any obvious problem (with business, education, communication, etc) is the symptom of an underlying relationship problem.

Rather than create an enterprise to fix problems, we are developing a way for relationships to get repaired or restored. When relationships are broken, there are countless opportunities to learn about oneself and the others. There are ways to outgrow past outlooks. We will use processes that change patterns of reacting and interacting.

When the underlying relationship problem is resolved -- the obvious problem vanishes without any expenditure of time, effort or money. An example from the discussion of last's week's Excellent Cheating may be helpful to grasp how problems easily disappear.

When classroom teachers "ask for plagiarism", they maintain broken relationships with their students. The teachers cannot relate to the students' points of view, look through the students' eyes, or support their intentions. The teachers attempt to control perceived misbehavior. Teachers close their minds, misdiagnose the problem, escalate the tensions, and learn nothing in the process. Cheat is not excellent, it's despicable.

Students then feel blamed, criticized, misunderstood and manipulated. The situation provides incentives to retaliate, create difficulties, oppose the power structure and sacrifice shared goals. Problems with plagiarism abound.

When the underlying relationship is restored, plagiarism vanishes. Teachers look through the students' eyes and see how plagiarism has been requested and rewarded. The teachers relate to the students' desires for "games worth playing". Teachers learn to stop assigning submittals that can be outsourced and plagiarized. Teachers open their minds to ways learning really happens. Students are engaged in expressing their own viewpoint, making decisions that have consequences, and experimenting with their own actions to discover the best approach. Their submittals are unique, heartfelt and records of personal experiences.

Students then feel valued, nurtured, guided and understood. The situation provides incentives to relate, create common ground, collaborate with authority figures and work toward common goals. Cheating makes no sense. Plagiarism vanishes.

When relationships are healthy, learning occurs. Differences become lessons. Changes occur to support the relationship. Everyone involved says they are growing from the experience. Solutions are found that abandon the obvious problems.

Technorati tags: problem solving, transformational change, relationships

No more Mr. Nice Guy

Once there was a Mr. Nice Guy who said "No more!". He'd had enough of his confidences being betrayed, his generosity being exploited and his life getting over-committed. He realized he needed to set some healthy boundaries. It was time to say "No" and be Mr. Tough Guy. He could no longer please other people without pleasing himself first. He needed to feel better about himself and what he was getting accomplished.

Being "Mr. Tough Guy" worked for awhile. With more structure in his life, he got more done. With fewer distractions, he stayed more focused. With greater determination, he moved faster toward his goals. With fewer entanglements that hurt his feelings, he spent less time processing painful setbacks and questioning his people-pleasing decisions.

It wasn't long before Mr. Tough Guy started getting hassled by people that loved him, cared for him deeply and enjoyed how well he related to them. They said he had turned into a cold machine. They claimed he was putting distance into their relationships. They were convinced he was turning into a "one track mind" that sacrificed everything to get a job done. They saw him trashing his creativity and playfulness in order to not get hurt, stepped on or betrayed again.

Mr. Tough Guy took all this feedback the wrong way. All he could hear was "go back to being Mr. Nice Guy". It appeared to him that his favorite people wanted a "people-pleaser" to take as their hostage. They only pressured him to sacrifice for them, not for the things he wanted to accomplish. He felt misunderstood and falsely accused by people that he thought had cared enough about him to get where he was coming from.

It made no sense why everyone was not thrilled with his new focus, progress and results. He could not figure out why all the drama in his life appeared so inescapable. He was bewildered by the persistent attempts of people to control his life instead of giving him the freedom, trust, respect and unconditional love he deserved.

He then saw a bumper sticker on a car as he drove home last week. It said: "Remember the 4 C's". Given how he was feeling, he figured the 4 C's were captivity, cruelty, corruption and crime. He called the phone number on the bumper sticker later that evening. He got a pre-recorded message that said:

"When you're on your own, the 4 C's are Creativity, Courage, Confidence and Compassion. When you're together, the 4 C's are Communication, Coordination, Cooperation, and Commitment. Forget heroics. Forget being a doormat. Be the best you can be while getting it done together".

He realized he had gone from doormat to heroics. He had a ways to go yet. He gave himself high marks for his creativity, courage and confidence. He realized he would be a better team player if he had stopped being "Mr. Nice Guy". He knew he was on the right track to become Mr. Tough Guy.

Today he realized his goals have changed. He's becoming a solid team player and collaborator. Everything he's doing to toughen up and tighten his self discipline is valuable. Everything he's going to do communicate, coordinate, cooperate and commit will seal the deal with anyone that plays his new game. People that want to take him hostage will fall by the wayside. People that get where he's coming from will be coming from the same place. His life suddenly got a lot easier.

Positions at a table

As I've used "epistemic frames" over the years to mentor entrepreneurs, I find we get lots of value out of picturing these frames. The most useful visual analogy I've found thus far -- is positions we can take at a table. Imagine these are places we can come from when facing what happened and choosing what to do next.

On top of the table: When we are in control and thinking we make things happen, we are dancing on the table top. We look down on people seated at the table and stand over anyone under the table. We cannot see eye to eye or allow others to be right. We are in a position to claim "winner takes all" and to overrule dissenters.

Under the table: When we are getting persecuted and thinking others make things happen, we are crouched under the table. We are playing small, telling victim stories and asking for more trouble. We cannot see eye to eye or endure other's abuse of power. We are in a position of getting kicked around, ignored or taken for granted.

Seated at the table: When we are relating to other points of view and thinking we make things happen collaboratively, we are seated in a chair at the table. We are sharing power, listening without fear, and teaming up to realize results. To our way of thinking, there are many right answers and different ways to win. We are in a position to nurture, empower and validate others.

Changing positions at the table: When we've been dancing on the tabletop, it's likely we we fall below the table. Once we've fallen enough times, we learn to take a seat at the table. When we've been trafficking in self pity under the table, it's likely we will over compensate with grandiosity, arrogance and manipulation. Once we've asked to get shot down enough times, we learn to take a seat at the table.

Technorati tags: epistemic frames, personal growth

Getting framed by epistemic frames

In the Introduction to "How Computer Games Help Children Learn", David Shaffer promotes a change in education from delivering content to transmitting the epistemic frames of competent practitioners. He is seeking a way for all children to become innovators. In my mentoring of entrepreneurs, I am also nurturing creativity and cultivating innovations. Yet my focus is on changing the epistemic frames in use. In either case, it's helpful to understand what "epistemic frames" are and how they effect learning, performance and outcome measures. If I question "are you good enough?", you have been framed by evaluation in an elimination round. You are on the brink of being outcast, excluded or cut from the team. I am assuming this is a black and white issue with no gray areas. I am in total control of the rules and application of criteria. You are invited to be silenced, dominated by my power and subjected to other external authorities. I am using an "epistemic frame" of superiority over you while giving you an epistemic frame of inferiority under me. The long term effect on your learning, creativity and intrinsic motivation would be devastating.

If I question "how good are you?", you have been framed by the premises of normative evaluation in a series of contests. I assume you can be compared to others on the same scale and stats can be recorded. Without anything being said, you will compare yourself to others, get on your case if you don't measure up and compete to be superior to others. You are being cultivated to use an epistemic frame of superiority and to have a devastating effect on other's creativity. You will get the idea that learning is tiring work that depends on external rewards to make the effort.

If I question "how are you good?", you have been framed by my use of idiosyncratic evaluation. I assume there is no comparison to others and there is much inside of you to bring out. Without any explicit guidance, you will find your voice, express yourself, and bring your gifts to the world. You are being cultivated to use an epistemic frame of creativity that will nurture other's informal learning. You will get the idea that learning is a flow experience and intrinsically rewarding.

Thus any "epistemic frame" is where I'm coming from, what I am assuming, what premise I'm using, the context I'm creating, the basis for my outlook or the way I am acting as-if. The effect on learning, performance and outcome measures is profound.

See also:

• Where are you coming from,


• There's no comparison,


• Succeed at your own peril

Technorati tags: epistemic frames, learning, evaluation

What's missing

Sherlock Holmes solved a mystery by noticing "the dog that did not bark in the night". It's much easier to notice a dog that did bark than a dog that did not. Knowing what's missing requires a sense of the big picture. Teaching twelve different college courses gave me an opportunity to discern a big picture of patterns in the student enrollment. I began seeing what was missing in most of the students enrolled in Employee Training & Development or Human Resource Management. I saw how this differed from students enrolled in Small Business Management or Organizational Behavior. Clark Aldrich brought all this back to mind yesterday in his post on the Learning Circuits Blog:

2. Your clients, be they sales teams or management, live in a world of results. That is the language they speak, and you are too removed from them if you are not speaking this language.

I experienced the reverse problem. When I spoke of results, metrics, outcome measures, impact or value, I lost my HR students. I was not speaking their language. It appeared most students drawn to the HR and T&D professions are process oriented. From a results orientation, they appear to be "going through the motions", "spinning their wheels", or "stuck in a rut". From their own process "epistemic frame", they are complying with management directives, conforming to policy requirements and implementing "change management plans".

When I talked of metrics with students in management courses, I spoke their language. They are preparing to "live in a world of results" as Clark says. Yet I eventually saw what was missing in their results orientation also. The focus on results can escalate adversarial contexts, reward shortcuts, disrupt ecologies and harm informal communities. Their results orientation needed to be combined with a system orientation that considers side effects, context and widespread repercussions. (Geetha's comment on Clark's post adds some context that was missing)

As I further explored storytelling, game design and uses of the theater metaphor in business, something else appeared missing from all the process, results and systems orientations.

Everything we do is creating an experience for ourselves and others. We are always telling a story with our words and actions. We relentlessly create a game with our "epistemic frame" that sets up others to score points or get penalized. We continually succeed or fail at being immersive or engaging. We are either perpetuating "more of the same old same old" or transforming our world.

Technorati tags: epistemic frames, results, systems