What is Education?- A thread on learning and teaching, the creative process, practice

[MikeF]

I'll be honest I think this is actually possible. A combatant commander J3 had his adjutant approach me for possibly briefing them in person in theater.

I've had similar things happen, although more along the lines of "can I take you out for a beer and pick your brains...".

That's outstanding. Ten years from now, I think some of the ideas we're discussing on collaboration will be standardized and become routine processes. We're already seeing this in the private and to some degree the public sectors- just watch an IBM commercial where the teacher has his students interact with children in China via webcam.. It's just a matter of how long are we going to wait to take care of this comparative advantage that we possess with our intellectual capital.. GEN Patraeus used it at TRADOC to write FM 3-24 and in Iraq with his counsel of colonels.

In fact, in some limited way, this forum represents some of the most rigourous thinking on the subject - yet no one here would be widely recognised as one of the "leading military thinkers."

Wilf, I think you underestimate the amount of indirect influence SWJ has. Dave Dillege and Bill Nagle started a grassroots organization with an amazing idea- a website that has peer-reviewed "living" documents and a rigorous open-debate forum that allows for discussion based off the merit of one's arguments rather than rank/status. Are some "heavy-hitters" afraid to publish here and have their ideas challenged? Of course, but that does not take away from the fact that many reporters come here to write stories, many students come here to learn, and many practicisioners come here to explain. Additionally, the freedom of this site allows for social networking, and it allows academics and other writers to test ideas before they go to print. I think, over time, you'll see more books recognize SWJ in their acknowledgement pages.

v/r

Mike

[marct]

Hi Mike,

That's outstanding. Ten years from now, I think some of the ideas we're discussing on collaboration will be standardized and become routine processes. We're already seeing this in the private and to some degree the public sectors- just watch an IBM commercial where the teacher has his students interact with children in China via webcam.. It's just a matter of how long are we going to wait to take care of this comparative advantage that we possess with our intellectual capital.. GEN Patraeus used it at TRADOC to write FM 3-24 and in Iraq with his counsel of colonels.

It's a touch more complex that that . Some of it is systemic as in the organizing principle of the system. Current PME and a lot of Higher Ed uses an Authority Ranking system as its base structural (relational) model, while what we are dealing with here is more of a reciprocity system. If you want an analogy from civilian life, it's the difference when you are looking for a job between just submitting a resume to a company (mail or online doesn't matter) and networking so that the job description and keywords are actually written with you in mind.

These structural, or relational if you prefer, systems are all based around the concept of distribution rather than around production. They have other characteristics that are tricky as well. For example, "trust" and "reputation" are the cornerstones of the system, unlike the current systems where position or office are the cornerstone. In reciprocity systems, you trust individuals; in Authority Ranking system, you trust offices and organizations; at least in our current ones.

Wilf, I think you underestimate the amount of indirect influence SWJ has. Dave Dillege and Bill Nagle started a grassroots organization with an amazing idea- a website that has peer-reviewed "living" documents and a rigorous open-debate forum that allows for discussion based off the merit of one's arguments rather than rank/status. Are some "heavy-hitters" afraid to publish here and have their ideas challenged? Of course, but that does not take away from the fact that many reporters come here to write stories, many students come here to learn, and many practicisioners come here to explain. Additionally, the freedom of this site allows for social networking, and it allows academics and other writers to test ideas before they go to print. I think, over time, you'll see more books recognize SWJ in their acknowledgement pages.

Totally agree with this assessment, Mike.

Cheers,

Marc

[William F. Owen]

Wilf, I think you underestimate the amount of indirect influence SWJ has. Dave Dillege and Bill Nagle started a grassroots organization with an amazing idea- a website that has peer-reviewed "living" documents and a rigorous open-debate forum that allows for discussion based off the merit of one's arguments rather than rank/status. Are some "heavy-hitters" afraid to publish here and have their ideas challenged?

I have profound respect for what the Dave and Bill have done, and I certainly do not underestimate the visibility of ideas here - but the good thinking and effective contributors to SWJ are not the lauded "COIN experts."

[Steve Blair]

I have profound respect for what the Dave and Bill have done, and I certainly do not underestimate the visibility of ideas here - but the good thinking and effective contributors to SWJ are not the lauded "COIN experts."

Nor are they they dyed-in-the-wool conventionalists. Some of them may post more than others, but IMO posting volume does not necessarily equal good thinking or effective contributions.

Most of the "good thinking" here seems to come in flurries, often sparked by a post from outside the mainstream. It's also usually collaborative, and not often the product of just one poster or one single point of view. That, to me, is the strength of this forum.

[William F. Owen]

but IMO posting volume does not necessarily equal good thinking or effective contributions.

....and as I have more posts than you, I can confirm this!!

[Steve Blair]

....and as I have more posts than you, I can confirm this!!

I didn't have any single individual in mind, Wilf, but generally making the point that some folks can confuse quantity (their own or others) for quality, or assume that because someone has X posts in Y thread he or she is automatically an expert.

And I certainly don't confuse my own posts with quality (in fact I'd say they most often are good examples of how NOT to find quality...). Usually I'm just thinking out loud (more or less), or tossing out a viewpoint or historical example that I feel might have been overlooked. Usually these sink into the electronic ether where they belong, but every once in a while they might make someone think or suggest a new or different approach. And that possibility is what keeps me posting, since I know there have been some folks here who have done the same for me and I figure I owe the community some payback.

[MikeF]

60 Minutes had a fascinating segment last Sunday on The Seed School in Washington, DC. The concept is fairly simple. The founders wanted to create a boarding school for impoverished, lower income children. In areas where others said these kids had no chance, the founders asked, "why not?" The current results are outstanding. In the last 4 of 5 years, every Seed School graduate has gone on to college.

I found the segment inspiring and another example of how creativity, sheer will, and leadership can overcome seemingly insurmountable odds.

v/r

Mike

[marct]

I wish I had seen it, Mike! Unfortunately, I spent half of the last week at a conference on Intelligence education and ended up being profoundly depressed.