Mentoring in the Information Age
Hi Ender,
Interesting idea, and its lack seems to go hand in hand with the decline of the regimental system (comments Steve?).
Quote:
Originally Posted by
selil
The apprentice and mentors model is fairly mature as a model. It was abandoned in the 50's and 60's as the rise of academia eclipsed and obliterated any other model.
As a formal model, I suspect you are absolutely correct, although it is still operative in many other areas including academia :). A lot of it goes back to how organizations conceive of knowledge, and to the conceptual distinctions and valuations these organizations place on differing types of knowledge.
In general, most Western societies recognize three overall forms of knowledge: "logos", "gnosis" and "thumos" (I'm using the Greek terms).
- "Logos", from which we get the suffix "-ology" roughly translates as "authoritative word". This is the basic type of knowledge that is taught in academia; it is codified, put together into inter-linking systems and presented as "valid" (meaning culturally validated by whatever system the culture uses). If you have studied Max Weber, it covers both "rational-legal knowledge" and "traditional knowledge" (which is actually a bad translation of herreschaft - "blood right" is better).
- "Gnosis", from which we get words like "Gnostic" and "Agnostic" roughly translates as "experiential knowledge" - "what I know from having experienced it". When Socrates talks about "the man who knows", this is the type of knowledge he is talking about. At the same time, it's also the type of knowledge that can be "taught" best by a mentorship or apprenticeship type program. In general, academics use this type of knowledge, but most disciplines "hide" it from their students (Anthropology, qualitative Sociology and Social Work are the major exceptions).
- "Thumos" is the type of knowledge that we use the least n any formal setting. It should properly be transliterated as "body knowledge", although terms like "gut knowledge" are the closest translation. In most Western societies, it is considered to be "invalid", although it is used extensively in high risk / high problem occupations and frequently"validated" (i.e. justified) with reference to experience or intuition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
selil
Socrates was a mentor rather than a teacher and his students were literally apprentices to his process. One mentor in this model can take on several apprentices and broaden the scope and match a hierarchical command structure. The apprentice/mentor model is NOT something you want to apply to everybody. You have to be selective in both directions of selection.
I must admit to being prejudiced in favour of Socrates - that's Xenophon's Socrates, not Platos' :D. You absolutely right about the application, however. Attempting to apply this style of teaching and learning means that you have to have an emotional and psychological "mesh" (or "empathy") between the student and teacher. If this is absent, it will fail miserably.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
selil
If you're an undergrad it might be a little soon to be building a self standing curriculum but I'll help you with an outcome based learning objective course model when you're ready.
Sure, I'll toss in an offer of help as well. I run a couple of servers and have my own Moodle site. If you want to play around with trying to set up a course, let me know and I'll build a basic page for you and let you play with it.
As a note, I would point out that the SWC itself is acting as a mentorship venue.
Marc
Love the Adopt a Sniper program...
This is a totally different focus but the "Adopt a Sniper" program is no joke and it REALLY helps.
We had a team leader in my platoon who wrote to them and they sent so MUCH gear to him (had to be upwards of $500-1000 worth of kit, two HUGE boxes).... if I remember right all of the optics and cleaning kits came right before Al Fajr and the rest came after... I still have a ton of my gear (hell I had to pay for most of it... I should get to keep it) and a few of the items I still use came from them!
If you are considering whether or not this is a good thing or not, let me tell you they helped us considerably and really seem to be dialed in on what the troops need. I don't remember the specifics and have not looked at the link yet, (headed to class) but if someone is trying to OBTAIN gear from this program they need to either be an 8541, or the equivalent thereof, OR know someone who is and is willing to write. We had two 8541's and were able to get enough kit to spread between the four team leaders (and then on down to the four teams - everyone got something!)
NOT a BAD deal.
Is there a difference between mentorship and leadership?
http://www.mca-marines.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6
Joel,
Let me say up front that I commend you for your energy and more importantly for wanting to embrace the fact that our young Marines are a hell of a lot more capable than we often give them credit for. That said, I think your ambitions are too high for the time being. I say this because of the way that we currently approach developing our leaders (see link above). We use "strategic corporal" as if it were a fact, but in reality, as you've repeatedly stated in numerous posts at SWC, it's a lot of lip service with little training to back the concept. The specifics of your initiative would put some meat to the term "strategic corporal" and I encourage you to continue your efforts toward this end. Further, when at the 70-80% solution, write an article for the Marine Corps Gazette. Most every General Officer in our Corps reads the Gazette and will most definitely take on board what you have to say.
Unfortunately, at the present time we do have a mentor program, as mentioned by the TBS Lt. Problem is that it's not fully embraced across the Corps, at all levels of leadership. I ask if there's a difference between mentorship and leadership because, for me at least, a good leader is naturally a good mentor and will do many of the things that you describe such as identifying a Marine's strengths and weaknesses, goals, etc. and then develop a plan to take advantage of strengths and help weaknesses in such a way that helps the Marine accomplish his or her goal(s). Further, a good leader should also take a personal interest in developing a Marine's MIND through PME, such as ensuring that books on the CMC reading list for each rank are read and discussed, as well as additional assignments based on the current operating environment, etc. Additionally, leaders should frequently sit down with Marines, look them in the eyes, and explain expectations and have the moral courage to tell a Marine when these expectations aren't being met and when they are. Sadly, I've been in the Corps for 6 years now and have had only 1 senior sit me down, look me in the eye balls and do all this.
For this reason I think your mentoring program should start with the very basic elements of leadership initially: talk to a Marine one-on-one, spell out goals, help develop a plan to achieve them, and then SUPERVISE. If this is done, much of what you talk about will be accomplished. For example, in counseling/mentoring/leading/emplace new buzzword of the day my Marines, I almost always heard Marines respond to the question: "what are your goals in the Corps?" with "to be the most technically proficient Marine in the squad or section, to be a PT stud, to be a team player, to reach the next rank, to start working toward a college degree, and on occasion, to become an officer." These were the norm. Now all a good leader has to do is lead the Marine that responds in these ways to the promise land. I don't think you need a Marine from another battalion to help. Plus, with optempo the way it is today, I'm not sure how many Marines from other units are around to help.
Last thought... in your unit, through your own force of will and personal example, you can make a mentoring program the norm. I have no doubt in my mind that this is true. Now, finish school and get your ass to IOC so that a platoon of infantrymen can have the leader they deserve!