I appreciate your preference for creative/extempore learning, but there's
a rub, and Mike in his post (immediately after yours) hits on it exactly.
Our system is designed to produce _failure_ just as much as success.
Some people may be able to carry off a free-fall approach to learning
with success, particularly if they're older or have done other types of
tasks without guidance. However, many of the people currently in the
middle of "receiving an education" in our current system are so
sensitized to the possibilities and punishments for failure that the fear
itself will inhibit any kind of creativity or chance-taking, overtly or
covertly.
When I taught a senior-level lab for experimental design in psych, I had
several pre-med students in the class, and if you want to see what fear
can do, watch a pre-med (particularly an immigrant who's carrying the
flag for his/her family) as they contemplate even a minute drop in their
GPA.
You may have had a fortunate personal history, or just be one of the
high-risk types (like me) who will jump in no matter how deep the water
is. However, it is neither fair nor productive to expect everyone to
operate like an intellectual Green Beret. We have made a societal Holy
Grail out of creativity, while not always remembering that underlying
most creativity is a foundation of competence in that specific area.
We do not have to put down restrictions and guidelines, but a few
friendly suggestions can be taken as such, and free up the reticent to
make their own contributions, which can turn out to be surprisingly
worthwhile.
Rachel
On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 09:20:43 -0700 Katherine_Goff who-is-at ceo.cudenver.edu
(Katherine Goff) writes:
>Rachel writes:
>>But what is the proper way to address a community, particularly if
>I've
>>never - literally - seen any of its members face to face, and in fact
>>don't know who most of them are? Obviously many members of xmca know
>>each other from other contexts, but what about newcomers? I feel the
>>tension very clearly, and also feel a difference between posting a
>>general question to the list (pull towards formality/written style)
>and
>>replying to a particular posting from a named individual
>>(conversational/informal). How does one learn to interact in such a
>>situation, where immediate feedback is minimal and usually limited?
>>(Think of all the nuances gleaned from non-verbal cues in FTF
>>interaction.)
>
>It wasn't all that long ago when I was in a similar place with similar
>worries.
>
>And I probably would have viewed an FAQ on participation as supportive
>and
>helpful.
>
>But when such things are given to new participants, they constrain the
>possibilities for creative expression and make innovation more
>difficult.
>Some new members may be turned off by what could be viewed as
>restrictions
>and prescriptions for participation. If the rules are ambiguous, they
>are
>open to interpretaion, open to new possibilities.
>
>I, personally, feel that I benefited from "taking the plunge" without
>sufficient information to feel completely comfortable.
>
>Kathie
>
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Life's backwards,
>Life's backwards,
>People, turn around.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Sinead O'Connor and John Reynolds
>Fire on Babylon: Universal Mother^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Katherine_Goff who-is-at ceo.cudenver.edu
>http://ouray.cudenver.edu/~kegoff/index.html
>
>