The Prompt...
"Aboriginal knowledge is not a description of reality but an understanding of the processes of ecological change and ever-changing insights about diverse patterns or styles of flux. . . To see things as permanent is to be confused about everything: an alternative to that understanding is the need to create temporary harmonies of interdependence through alliances and relationships among all forms and forces. This web of interdependence is a never-ending source of wonder. . . " (264)
James Youngblood Henderson
Chickasaw/Bear Clan and Cheyenne of Oklahoma
From Marie Batiste's Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision (2000)
Vancouver: UBC Press
My response....
As I prepare for this coming week, this quote is affirming and very pertinent. Every other year the Foundation I work for brings together nonprofit professionals from across rural downstate Illinois to meet each other, learn together…and hopefully build relationships for future work. This year (actually from Thursday on) marks a shift in this work as we will be launching an online community and virtual resource center to support these relationships and sharing (www.goodworksconnect.org). So the conference itself is designed with open group processes (www.conversationcafe.org and www.opensource.org) to make it very participant-centered. What I find fascinating about inclusive group processes and social media alike is that they even the power playing field and give everyone a voice and importance. Everyone has a stake in the outcome and the work is only as good as what each person contributes.
Henderson’s quote also evokes for me an important reminder of how these patterns/harmonies are always evolving or temporary. As a colleague Mike Green would share, “What works in one community; works in one community.” Each community or situation has its place in time and what works at one time will not always work. This is critical for the aforementioned projects as well as any change process. It also means that anyone leading change must be very aware of these evolutions and open to change to embrace them.
Social media is a phenomenal example of this flexibility and nimbleness, as it is not led by one person but by the “community.” Everyone has shared access to people and information and the quality of the information is affirmed by the number of people who “follow” that person or re-share (retweet) that information. As I enter this week, my intention is to hold these relationships and the opportunities I have to cultivate them as the “source of wonder” that they truly are.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Antioch PhD in Leadership and Change
One of the opportunities I have to close triangles I have just started...a PhD program (Antioch University PhD in Leadership & Change) with 27 individuals from across the globe. What I have already found in my first three weeks is that it is going to be a great opportunity to think about the work I do and connect it to my studies. Every week I have a prompt given for me to respond to. I will share these on the blog as a way to be as transparent as possible about my journey....and so that everyone can share in the learning!
Here's my first response from last week....
A few weeks prior to the residency in Yellow Springs I had a chance to spend the morning with Dr. Gregory Cajete. He was giving a lecture of his book Native Science and started by talking about the epistemology (how he came to know what he knows) that led to his work. I appreciated how in his presentation he was able to weave the philosophy that guided his approach into his experience and research. I reflected on this experience as I read this article. I have always thought of myself as leaning towards the qualitative research as I enjoy finding themes and context from lived experiences. What surprised me while reading this article is that my basis for my seemingly qualitative work has not been tied to philosophy but in the human experience.
Honestly, all of the philosophical texts referenced seemed quite overwhelming! Where does one start? It also seemed that most texts had been refuted at some point so how does one begin to determine who is “right?” From the texts mentioned, Gadamer, Geertz, and Habermas intrigued me, as it seems their work is tied to human behavior and interactions.
Both of my degrees are from an Agricultural Education department in a College of Agriculture. As you can imagine, all of the other departments in the College are strictly quantitative and mine was qualitative. Just over the past ten years or so have Agricultural Education professors found their way into college or university leadership positions. I have to imagine that, in part, this is due to the emerging appreciation for both the qualitative and quantitative approaches and the shared philosophy that guides them. The article seemed to point towards this shift and it was interesting to tie to my experience.
I think my methodological challenges over the coming years will come most in grounding my work in philosophy. I have had the opportunity in my professional experiences to do quite a bit of qualitative and quantitative work and am fairly comfortable in coming up with questions, exploring various ways to approach the work, and report on the efforts. As Kezar shared “My thesis is that the scholarship in the field suffers because we have had limited exposure to and engagement with the debates and assumptions that shape and frame thinking in the social sciences“ (p. 44). I agree. What has been missing for me is the grounding for what is known about the people side—that has been proven for years—that perhaps has not been taken into account.
As I think about my journey to become a reflective practitioner/scholar, I know that it will take quite a bit of work to even know where to start with the reading and application of the philosophical texts. I am also aware that for me to truly internalize this work, it must be applied to something I have experienced or have deep interest. I saw this intersection modeled by the Antioch faculty in Yellow Springs and from Dr. Cajete…so I know it is possible!
Here's my first response from last week....
A few weeks prior to the residency in Yellow Springs I had a chance to spend the morning with Dr. Gregory Cajete. He was giving a lecture of his book Native Science and started by talking about the epistemology (how he came to know what he knows) that led to his work. I appreciated how in his presentation he was able to weave the philosophy that guided his approach into his experience and research. I reflected on this experience as I read this article. I have always thought of myself as leaning towards the qualitative research as I enjoy finding themes and context from lived experiences. What surprised me while reading this article is that my basis for my seemingly qualitative work has not been tied to philosophy but in the human experience.
Honestly, all of the philosophical texts referenced seemed quite overwhelming! Where does one start? It also seemed that most texts had been refuted at some point so how does one begin to determine who is “right?” From the texts mentioned, Gadamer, Geertz, and Habermas intrigued me, as it seems their work is tied to human behavior and interactions.
Both of my degrees are from an Agricultural Education department in a College of Agriculture. As you can imagine, all of the other departments in the College are strictly quantitative and mine was qualitative. Just over the past ten years or so have Agricultural Education professors found their way into college or university leadership positions. I have to imagine that, in part, this is due to the emerging appreciation for both the qualitative and quantitative approaches and the shared philosophy that guides them. The article seemed to point towards this shift and it was interesting to tie to my experience.
I think my methodological challenges over the coming years will come most in grounding my work in philosophy. I have had the opportunity in my professional experiences to do quite a bit of qualitative and quantitative work and am fairly comfortable in coming up with questions, exploring various ways to approach the work, and report on the efforts. As Kezar shared “My thesis is that the scholarship in the field suffers because we have had limited exposure to and engagement with the debates and assumptions that shape and frame thinking in the social sciences“ (p. 44). I agree. What has been missing for me is the grounding for what is known about the people side—that has been proven for years—that perhaps has not been taken into account.
As I think about my journey to become a reflective practitioner/scholar, I know that it will take quite a bit of work to even know where to start with the reading and application of the philosophical texts. I am also aware that for me to truly internalize this work, it must be applied to something I have experienced or have deep interest. I saw this intersection modeled by the Antioch faculty in Yellow Springs and from Dr. Cajete…so I know it is possible!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
