I appreciate John Paul Fullerton's effort in researching and validating my
statement that the "data" (a supposed research finding that proved that their
were serious behaivioral changes evident in schools today) supporting claims
that the social enviornment had deteriorated so badly that education at the
high school level could not be expected to succeed was not true. John's
actions demonstrate the real excitement of a learning organization, one in
which their is a real desire to look at one' own assumptions and beliefs and
a williness develop new models of "reality."
However his final comment presents me with a learning problem which I am
presently challenged by in my work:
>"The lists' broad sweep ignores that some public schools are
>devastated by violence and substance abuse and others hardly touched
>at all. They should not guide our choices on education policy."
>To me, that seems fair to some extent. I still believe school
>discipline to be significantly different now than in 1940; however,
>others know more about this than me.
When data does not support belief, we are challenged to trust the efforts
of others. Trust becomes necessary when I am asked to try a new, and
perhaps risky, behaivior because someone other than me has found new
information. The question is, what creates the trust necessary to risk
acting on new learnings?
Martin Levine
MartyML@aol.com
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>