KC has touched certain topics about learning structure among children
which have gotten much press over the years: how much structure is
enough; and, or course, what kind of structure?
Here are a few generalizations. A debate continues at various societal
levels about where the line exists between structure which actually
supports growth, and structure which for its complexity/inflexibility
stifles creativity. Those engaged in this discourse or debate or savage
exchange (as the case may be) are driven by human desire--a conflicting,
often paradoxical human desire--for comfort in the known. This desire
meets head on#004##004##004##004##004# an overflowing cup of neural
capacity often seeking to expand into uncharted areas (curiosity and
KC describes her daughter's soccer prowess, couching in the description a
concept of centripetal force. At the center, a desire to know what she
has to do, so that she can do it well: goal setting (no pun intended).
Kids appreciate that. We have, many of us, experienced both that need and
the need fulfilled yielding positive outcomes.
Then there is in some children that questioning and exploring, a capacity
to leave the comfort zone behind for the sake of momentary, real-time
In the case of soccer, structure will always exist in the form of the Laws
of the Game. Within a demarcated pitch, you follow certain principles.
Ah, but there, the requirements end. "Genius," the sportscaster coos. "A
thing of beauty," a commentator gasps. Is this a game, or what?
>From my very personal perspective, KC, your daughter may one day be
fortunate enough to learn about the secret of total soccer, where
positioning is an extremely dynamic concept, and where collaboration in
the moment is paramount. Is this the best of two psychological contexts?
Is there a metaphor here for organizations in general?
The Soccer Fanatic, also
-- Barry Mallis firstname.lastname@example.org
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <email@example.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>