The topic for the module is whether it is part of human nature to share and collaborate. Howard Rheingold, in his video address, points out that collaboration and cooperation were what made survival possible for early humans...the ability to hunt and provide for the family was more than any one ordinary hunter could accomplish on his own. Consequently, humans began not only traveling in packs, but living in close proximity to one another.
As humans evolved to include agriculture and the raising of domestic animals for food, permanent settlements and villages developed (and people began to complain about the neighbors). This collective and social pattern has continued to develop and evolve into today's cities and communities (where there are still many reasons to complain about the neighbors). The workplace has also evolved somewhat--we no longer band together to go and hunt down a mammoth, but in today's knowledge-based workplace, the person with the right set of knowledge and experience leads their band of hunters to their objective.
Having these particular skills and knowledge is a good thing, but sharing knowledge is not always done well in the workplace. My own organization is known for its tradition of "information hoarding"--because the traditional rating system placed a value on an employee based on what they knew, it was simply understood that you did not share your particular knowledge because that diluted and diminished your value in the eyes of the rater.
Unfortunately, this behavior has had a long time to become ingrained, and changing the culture is going to take a while. Our new senior leadership has called for "a culture of collaboration and cooperation"--I will be there to welcome it whenever it finally arrives, and although I will not be alone, let's just say that we are not in the majority at this point in time.
The other encouraging trend that I see is that our new hires are accustomed to group projects and collaborative efforts and teamwork, and do so without being threatened, cajoled, begged, or directed to do so. As long as we can keep the senior management from undoing these good behaviors long enough for that generation of dinosaurs to become extinct, the culture will change under its own weight. The emerging technologies that make it easier and transparent to collaborate and share data and information and ideas, as well as to communicate with one another across organizational boundaries.
If we were industry, there would be economic and monetary incentives to change quickly: Rheingold cited Toyota and Eli Lilly as two examples of corporations that have collaborated and evolved to meet new challenges. I would hope that an update of this presentation would also include GM and Chrysler among the "thought leaders" of the automotive industry.
In short, I see that there is a basic human tendency to work together. That tendency can be overridden by self-preservation instincts and other environmental factors. I believe that human best behaviors will prevail over the long term--I've seen substantial change in my own career so far, and change is happening more quickly as technology drives it forwards. The light at the end of the tunnel may just be daylight.
Resources
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Anne, you bring up some very good points. "Information hoarding" is very frustrating. I much prefer working with a team of teachers who share ideas. I believe in putting it all out there and encouraging others to grab what works for them. I do the same with their ideas. Some of the best ideas are born out of bits and pieces of all of our ideas.
For my other class, we had to look at the Obama-Biden plan for education. It has a statement that they want to get rid of teachers that fall into that "dinosaur" category. It will be interesting to see how this is proposed and followed through with, but I applaud that the situation is being looked at and thought about.
As I read our posts, I find this issue becoming increasingly one of perspective and choice. The fact that survival instincts probably trump our tendency to work together highlights the duality. Which do we choose as the base? It seems logical arguments can be made for either. So, which is most useful for us as educators? Is it better to approach students with an instinct of selfish progress and competition? Or is it better to hold collaboration in our hearts and minds as we work to build the society of tomorrow? Or, as Koh talks about, are we too myopic in our views and unable to see the contentious, competitive reality of the “outside” world?
I am not sure what the answers are for anyone but me.
Our collective post got me pondering... probably the point of the post :) Merging our theories, it seems that we are working with a more social, collaborately literate generation. If we provide those types of experiences and reinforce that type of behavior as teachers and a society, then it is likely that that is the direction society will go. Positive or negative, I agree that the ball is rolling and we are going to continue that way at least for a while. What I do like is that we are at a pivotal point in education; I think that is what makes Dewey's work so prevalent to today. His work was published at a pivotal point in history, just like we are looking at with education.
Shannon & Anne
I agree with Anne's mention of info hoarding and the need for much time to gradually pull us out of a ditch that has been dug for a very long time. That comment seems to go hand in hand with the getting rid of dinosaurs comment. But bottom line, I wonder if it takes the extinction of a generation (the dinosaurs) to really begin phasing in new thought processes.
Is there a solution or do we really just have to wait it out.
Koh
Post a Comment