Choice is an Illusion? LO4598

Roy Winkler (rwinkler@iquest.net)
Thu, 04 Jan 1996 10:03:09 -0800

Replying to LO4569 --

John Paul Fullerton wrote:
> Yes, that seems right to me. I was wanting to make the "learning
> situation" such as
>
> punching my friend + grieving = learning not to punch him

This event fits the "Affective Learning Cycle" nicely. An
*event* is followed by *feelings* related to the event, followed by a
"what happened" question that helps one marry the feelings with the
event, followed by *learnings* about the event, followed by
*applications* of those learnings in similar events. The cycle repeats.

Event. Feelings. What Happened? Learnings. Applications.

In this case:
Event: I punched my friend.
Feelings: grieving, loss, fear, regret
What Happened: I felt bad feelings when I punched my friend.
Learnings: When I punch my friend I feel badly.
Applications: I will not punch my friend.

Sorry I'm still on vacation and don't have my source ready for
this model. It's in wide use among facilitators, though, at least the
ones I work with. Notice that the model predicts that when the feelings
are judged as "good" stemming from an event, the application is likely to
sustain the behavior. When feelings are judged as "bad," the applications
are likely to prevent that behavior from recurring.
Try running this through the model. A child touches a hot stove
for the first time.

> Some "learning situations" may not need to be experienced for the needed
> understanding to be working. Often when we gain knowledge from someone
> knowledgeable there's the sense - yes, this person knows what they're
> talking about.

Let's differentiate between learning a skill and learning
knowledge. To learn a skill, one must "do" the activity. For example,
in riding a bicycle, it is not sufficient to simply read about it or be
told about it; one must *do* the thing in order to learn the skills
associated with it.
Conversely, when I learn knowledge, it is sufficient for me to
hear *about* the information. I can learn about Kubla Kahn without ever
meeting him or talking to him. I can learn history without having lived
it.
Since, in a learning organization, we are talking often about
experimenting to find better ways to conduct our processes, a central
element of our learning must be in *doing* something or other different.
Therefore, the affective learning cycle applies and we will tend to
repeat that activity only if it produces positive feelings.
My point is that management must give everyone an arena of
consent within which to experiment with alternative processes and
behaviors to see if those changes will enhance progress toward the
organizational purpose.

> We
> can, in fact, open an unsealed envelope and take out its contents without
> so testing its limits that it tears.

Can you remember whether you have *ever* torn an envelope? Can
you remember if you have ever torn a sheet of paper of similar weight as
an envelope? My sense is that the reason you may be able to handle an
envelope so deftly is that somewhere in your past, you discovered just
the right force to get the paper to do what you want. I would contend
that you discovered this by making the paper do things you didn't want
(such as tearing) as well as doing what you did want, thereby learning
the boundaries of force to use with a common envelope.

-- 
@__Roy_J._Winkler,_AAS,_BSM...
@__Consultant:_OD/HRD/Group_Dynamics
@__UAW/GM____Anderson,_Indiana___USA
@__E-Mail:  rwinkler@iquest.net