Learning Histories LO4656

Tobin Quereau (quereau@austin.cc.tx.us)
Sat, 6 Jan 1996 13:52:55 -0600 (CST)

Replying to LO4577 --

Thanks, Joe, for the comments. My replies are interwoven in your message...

On Wed, 3 Jan 1996 NEANY@aol.com wrote:
> In response to Michael, Tobin wrote

[partly snipped]

> >...Isn't the entire western legal tradition
> >a sort of "cultural/societal memory?" Lawyers and judges consult the
> >cases which have been argued before, compare them to the circumstances
> >at hand, and look for precedence which is "on point". So we don't just have
> >a system of LAW, we have a system of LAW as interpreted and applied in
> >interaction with specific contexts, conditions, and experiences.

Joe wrote...

> I wonder if this is a "cultural/societal memory"? There are certain
> standards in law (statutes, regulations, etc) that the courts (judges)
> interpret) from whatever paradigms 'they' bring to the bench.

Tobin again...

My use of "cultural/societal" was intended to compare to "corporate" and
is, of course, only vaguely accurate. I meant it mostly in the sense that
any legal system is a reflection of the culture and society in which it is
employed, nothing more precise than that. Those who interpret it, the
lawyers and judges and juries (and now, of course, the international
media), do most certainly bring their own frameworks, assumptions, and
expectations with them to the task. (I tend to reserve the term "paradigm"
to the larger context which they all share at a more unconscious and
pervasive level, but I do understand what you are pointing out here.)

> I wonder, however, how an organization would collect all the 'tidbits' of
> information that create the organization's culture. How people act, the
> things people say, what's modeled and rewarded... How do we fit these into
> the corporate learning? Or do we?

I don't think we _do_ fit them all in. They reside in the "culture", that
larger reservoir of information and context that is beyond capture in a
very precise way, but which is experienced by those who come in contact
with that system. In the same way that we have the concept of the
"unconscious" in psychology, I think that social systems could be said to
have a "culture". Our task is not to "fit" anything "in", but to make
more accessible the information which is already there, but unnoticed or
avoided.

> Tobin went on to write later
>
> >Once we accept that the people who "know where to look" are becoming
> >an endangered species, it becomes essential to capture _less and less_
> >so that those who do decide to search for relevant information can do so
> >with some hope of success.
>
> I need some help here understanding why when " people who "know where to
> look" are becoming >an endangered species" does it mean capturing less
> knowledge is essential?

My thought here is that as those who know where to look leave or are
dismissed, the less there is to look through, the more likely we are to
initiate a search. Imagine having the choice of the Library of Congress or
the local branch of the city system in which to find something without
assistance... We need to focus our "capture" process more when we have
less knowledge of the search procedures available.

> I know that Tobin wrote that once this happens ....
> > requires us, of course, to make sure as much as possible that the
> >information we do capture is that which is rich enough to stimulate our
> >thinking and offer us some guidance. In this respect, I wonder if the
> >legal profession's model of case law could be of value.
>
> Who sets the 'paradigm' the 'information archivist' uses to determine what
> information if 'rich' enough to be captured?
>
> I wonder if an organization should try to capture what each employee (as
> an individual) believes is an important 'golden nugget(or nuggets)' of all
> the information s/he has and ackowledges as something to be preserved by
> the organization and passed on.....

My own particular bias on this issue, Joe, is that there should not be
just an "information archivist" working on the capture and collation of
information and knowledge. I agree with your idea that _each_ person take
some responsibility for adding to the "memory base". How the information
is collected and stored might benefit from the services of a specialist,
and such a person or group could assist those for whom the task seems too
confusing or intimidating to do, but I would shy away from having any
single access point or agent through which everything moves. The more we
could have available access and exploration by interested parties on there
own, the more use of the "memory" we would have.

Thanks for carrying the conversation forward, Joe. I hope this makes my
musings more understandable. Any other thoughts on this out there?

--
Tobin Quereau
Austin Community College
quereau@austin.cc.tx.us