Scott;
>>For me, what's most important is that in talking only about 1/2 of a
dyadic relationship (teach, manage, coach, help), I miss the other half
(learn, accept decisions, accept feedback, accept assistance). All these
words we are using refer to a two interaction. *snip*
>>From our work there, it is clear to me that to talk about teaching without
understanding how a learner learns is of little value. I'm tempted to
start discussing the characteristics of a teaching/learning model based on
the body of knowledge, but I'll hold off. >>
You make an excellent point, and I sense an underlying whole-systems way
of thinking informing that insight. You set me wondering what we would
come up with if we chunked up from the individual level dyad of
learner-teacher to the dyad Learning Organization -???. Aha, who or what
is doing the teaching, and what are *its* preferred teaching styles?
A second thought: Would it be useful to see what maps across from
individual to organization if we were to discuss the characteristics of
teaching/learning models?
Charles
-- Charles Parry Specialized Resources International Boston University Sargent Camp 36 Sargent Camp Road Hancock, New Hampshire 03449 USA INTERNET:74150.236@compuserve.com Fax: 603.525.4151 Tel: 603.525.4451Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>