As a teacher one can be terribly naive with devastating results for organizational pace and resources. One can believe what one is teaching is being absorbed, will be used, is appreciated, the need is felt and that students will be, if not grateful certainly more effective in their work as they go along. Painful experience proves otherwise and can do so repeatedly; forcing one to ponder, what, if anything will bring on the realisation in a learner that there is a need to learn? After all, more often than not, the young worker, fresh out of graduate school does not have the experience to gauge their own quality or gaps in competencies and therefore the need for further training is not felt.
When inputs are provided, the premise is that there is an interest in increasing competency, a passion for the subject or a commitment to the field of work/study. What if none of these motivators were true? What if the only motivator were to earn money? What then? What does one do in an environment in which the new graduate can be highly paid because they have graduated from a particular school - not even one which can prove its credentials through its work with the student - but just one which is a brand; and the graduate can perform to satisfaction for organisations who don't demand more than what the graduate has to offer. How do you staff in such an environment?
Even with the commitment to compensate for the lack of competencies by setting up an internal training program, tapping into motivation to learn is difficult because the environment allows for low quality and buys it at a high fee. It makes you wonder who comes to work for you? The naive teacher would think that those interested in learning, committed to professional quality etc make up the staff, but when challenged to learn, one receives a rude shock by the response that only a certain amount of work is possible for the fee that is paid.
I don't like admitting it, but it remains true that the development sector won't make you rich if you don't work for the largest agencies and if you happen to be honest. Is the advice for youngsters to be that they do not join up or only do so if they have financial support of some kind?
More and more, I am becoming of the belief that young professionals in the field should undergo HR counseling, in which they set goals for themselves. Prioritising is essential. I do not believe it is possible to make a lot of money and be young and have high quality. It would be possible if the schools they went to had done their jobs but unfortunately they did not. English, writing skills, the ability to work collaboratively, knowing the difference between mentoring and supervision, programming, M&E, curriculum design, pedagogic auditing, community mobilisation - are some of the areas that are severely lacking in the competencies that graduates come to apply for jobs with. The expectation is that experience will teach them - they learn at the cost of the more experienced and the organisation's resources - but demand to be paid highly and remain committed to the idea that their college education has rendered them ready and they do not need to learn.
Thus, my question: how do you motivate the need to learn?
Wednesday, 25 April 2012
Friday, 10 February 2012
Mentoring to Scale Quality
It has been a privilege and pleasure to mentor leaders as they define their journey. My interest being in scaling up while maintaining quality, the journeys have been about learning how to nurture the small, backyard, organically, intuitively seeded large family to learning how to lead institutions across states.
Very often the business of going to scale is thought to be about the numbers - the targets and the money that backs that objective. The product is a concern as far as it supports the former. Organisations make decisions around which to work with first - the numbers, the money, the product. That the product itself is the result of processes and systems is recognized but is slotted lower down the list of priorities because the money is not dependent on it. The end product is all that needs to be in place - that too, to the extent to which the donor world is interested. And its not very interested at all.
Gen1Can works with the reality of the variables above - the pressures of the scale - sometimes the surprise of it - an opportunity can pass you by very quickly, the money, the donor requirements, the needs of the market, the imperative to deliver at the will of the pressures. But the focus of Gen1Can is to work on the product (when it is education) and the processes of that maintain the quality of the product in place (whatever the product).
Pedagogy is often not understood. Often it is misunderstood as relevant only to curriculum. It is the science of learning. It is the technology behind the transfer of knowledge. Wherever knowledge is transferred, whether it is under the purview of the HR Department, that of the Knowledge Department, the Product Design Department, in the Sales or the Management Department; this technology is needed to ensure that learning occurs in the best conditions, is tailored to the learner and is sustainable.
The leader of the organisation or the head of a Department becomes the best point of entry because he or she controls the variables of quality that need to be tweaked. The decisions around the technology are theirs to make. Also, in the NGO sector, very often, as scale is sometimes unplanned, sudden and the resource base is not ready to absorb the scale, the leader as an individual is required to grow from being a visionary to becoming a marketing and managerial head - functions of leadership not required heretofore.
Sometimes it feels like there is so much to say and get done in the organisations that I support. One cannot get away from the reality that work can happen ONLY at the pace of the people at the organisation. Sometimes, it can only happen at the pace of the people who I am talking to in the organisation. very often I am hired by Heads of Departments, more often than not by the Heads of the Knowledge or Product Departments of Education organisations who do not understand that pedagogy is not essentially related to the education sector - that it is about the technology that determines and then controls the variables of quality - thereby is to do with management, HR, product design systems, quality control systems, marketing and sales. Too often, my frustration comes from not being able to communicate this and therefore, talking only to the specific Department that hired me. Then begins the inefficient process of the HOD being convinced, taking it to the Heads meet where it gets debated to death, the guy comes back battered and confused, 5 steps back from the 8 we had covered together because there is no way I could have downloaded all the pedagogic logic that s/he would have needed to float the meeting and the decisions needed. This is followed either by retrials or capping the amount of advice that I give to the organisation based on the sphere of influence of the HOD. Rarely, the chance presents itself to skip levels and the problem falls away while the solution takes hold with consensus. Thus, leaders of organisations are the entry point for the support that Gen1Can provides.
Very often the business of going to scale is thought to be about the numbers - the targets and the money that backs that objective. The product is a concern as far as it supports the former. Organisations make decisions around which to work with first - the numbers, the money, the product. That the product itself is the result of processes and systems is recognized but is slotted lower down the list of priorities because the money is not dependent on it. The end product is all that needs to be in place - that too, to the extent to which the donor world is interested. And its not very interested at all.
Gen1Can works with the reality of the variables above - the pressures of the scale - sometimes the surprise of it - an opportunity can pass you by very quickly, the money, the donor requirements, the needs of the market, the imperative to deliver at the will of the pressures. But the focus of Gen1Can is to work on the product (when it is education) and the processes of that maintain the quality of the product in place (whatever the product).
Pedagogy is often not understood. Often it is misunderstood as relevant only to curriculum. It is the science of learning. It is the technology behind the transfer of knowledge. Wherever knowledge is transferred, whether it is under the purview of the HR Department, that of the Knowledge Department, the Product Design Department, in the Sales or the Management Department; this technology is needed to ensure that learning occurs in the best conditions, is tailored to the learner and is sustainable.
The leader of the organisation or the head of a Department becomes the best point of entry because he or she controls the variables of quality that need to be tweaked. The decisions around the technology are theirs to make. Also, in the NGO sector, very often, as scale is sometimes unplanned, sudden and the resource base is not ready to absorb the scale, the leader as an individual is required to grow from being a visionary to becoming a marketing and managerial head - functions of leadership not required heretofore.
Sometimes it feels like there is so much to say and get done in the organisations that I support. One cannot get away from the reality that work can happen ONLY at the pace of the people at the organisation. Sometimes, it can only happen at the pace of the people who I am talking to in the organisation. very often I am hired by Heads of Departments, more often than not by the Heads of the Knowledge or Product Departments of Education organisations who do not understand that pedagogy is not essentially related to the education sector - that it is about the technology that determines and then controls the variables of quality - thereby is to do with management, HR, product design systems, quality control systems, marketing and sales. Too often, my frustration comes from not being able to communicate this and therefore, talking only to the specific Department that hired me. Then begins the inefficient process of the HOD being convinced, taking it to the Heads meet where it gets debated to death, the guy comes back battered and confused, 5 steps back from the 8 we had covered together because there is no way I could have downloaded all the pedagogic logic that s/he would have needed to float the meeting and the decisions needed. This is followed either by retrials or capping the amount of advice that I give to the organisation based on the sphere of influence of the HOD. Rarely, the chance presents itself to skip levels and the problem falls away while the solution takes hold with consensus. Thus, leaders of organisations are the entry point for the support that Gen1Can provides.
Friday, 16 December 2011
Parenting Woes - To Parent or Not to Parent
Being very new to parenting myself, I am too often confronted with the question of whether or not to parent at all. Am I to offer advice? Is listening enough? Who will teach ****** if I don't. Too often I am told that all that is required of me is to listen. Isn't it possible that I have an opinion? Are parents not allowed those? God forbid the opinion is not the one your child wants to hear.
Saturday, 19 March 2011
On the Subject of English
English is all the rage. We are well beyond the point at which one can even as why this is, without sounding moronic. It is a foregone conclusion that it must be taught to children in schools and practiced at home between parents and children and amongst children. It is taken to be a language of necessity and survival, not a gateway to a way of life, but the only way to survive the only surviving way of life.
Who should teach this language? Do they know how? Do they know the language at all? Who taught the teachers? Is the teacher fluent? Where do the teachers go when they get stuck with teaching it? Is everyone sure what 'correct' English might be? What if no one at home is fluent in English? How do you support the child? Is there a grammar book that one can swear by? What if none of the other children at school speak the language either? What is appropriate instruction of English for children at Elementary school and where does one get it? This is a question that parents in Delhi struggle with.
Perhaps what is more relevant to struggle with, is what it is doing to identity? The reason that a parents sets a goal for a child is as important as the goal itself. Why we want our children to learn the language, to use where and for what purpose needs to be clear to us, as the teaching of the language comes bundled with all these expectations. Also, if learning the language means leaving something behind and moving towards the construction of a new, different and 'better' identity, then the way we feel about our children's past identity and future one will be communicated too.
The subject of how to teach the language comes second. What comes first is being clear why we think it is important to teach it. And most important is, to realize and admit to ourselves as parents and educators what we expect will happen if we and our children know the language. Where do we expect our children to use the language? With whom? Where do we use it? With whom? Are these sets of people different? Do we hope they will be?
Language is key to culture. It is also a part of culture. When educators train teachers in schools to teach the language, they are immediately, intruding into the culture of the teacher as well as of the children in her classroom along with the parents whose homes these children hail from.
Dreams and aspirations for our children are complex almost tangible motivators that drive us to do sometimes silly and almost always brave things. In the bargain, we chart our children's futures without them even knowing it. Why we decide what we do, for them surely deserves our attention and time.
Reflecting on why English is an important ingredient for our children's future, is key because it is central to what schools we choose and then how we supplement the learning they engage in at school.
Who should teach this language? Do they know how? Do they know the language at all? Who taught the teachers? Is the teacher fluent? Where do the teachers go when they get stuck with teaching it? Is everyone sure what 'correct' English might be? What if no one at home is fluent in English? How do you support the child? Is there a grammar book that one can swear by? What if none of the other children at school speak the language either? What is appropriate instruction of English for children at Elementary school and where does one get it? This is a question that parents in Delhi struggle with.
Perhaps what is more relevant to struggle with, is what it is doing to identity? The reason that a parents sets a goal for a child is as important as the goal itself. Why we want our children to learn the language, to use where and for what purpose needs to be clear to us, as the teaching of the language comes bundled with all these expectations. Also, if learning the language means leaving something behind and moving towards the construction of a new, different and 'better' identity, then the way we feel about our children's past identity and future one will be communicated too.
The subject of how to teach the language comes second. What comes first is being clear why we think it is important to teach it. And most important is, to realize and admit to ourselves as parents and educators what we expect will happen if we and our children know the language. Where do we expect our children to use the language? With whom? Where do we use it? With whom? Are these sets of people different? Do we hope they will be?
Language is key to culture. It is also a part of culture. When educators train teachers in schools to teach the language, they are immediately, intruding into the culture of the teacher as well as of the children in her classroom along with the parents whose homes these children hail from.
Dreams and aspirations for our children are complex almost tangible motivators that drive us to do sometimes silly and almost always brave things. In the bargain, we chart our children's futures without them even knowing it. Why we decide what we do, for them surely deserves our attention and time.
Reflecting on why English is an important ingredient for our children's future, is key because it is central to what schools we choose and then how we supplement the learning they engage in at school.
Sunday, 23 January 2011
Musings on Training
In the education circles especially amongst academicians, you will get your head bitten off if you say that good teachers have to basically just be good people. Vociferous and often long-winded and boring explanations follow, mostly justifying the skills that teachers need to develop that these people earn their living building.
I agree with the skill part, but want to make a case for the attitudes that must come with, and the basis of these attitudes in a therapeutic experience of self discovery and reflection. Common sense tell us that our roles as workers, just like all the other ways we manifest our Selves is dependent on how developed that Self is. The more work done on the Self, the more potential is actualised and reflected in the roles we play. And thus, any hindrances to actualisation there might be, will also be reflected in the quality of the roles we play, including the work we do.
Supervision, mentoring, managing, ongoing capacity building, training and support are all words on the same spectrum that mean very different things to people in the business. To cut to the chase, the work done with an individual that stays through the lifetime to be used as an ingredient of change and growth by him or her, through any of these processes, only happens when these processes include robust work with the Self.
The only way to reach the Self is to accept it. The processes that must be undertaken to get to the point where one can reach the Self broadly come under the purview of therapy. Unless the process of supervision, mentoring etc etc do not specifically include as their mainstay, processes of therapy which can provide the opportunity for the learner to get in touch with their Selves and therefore attempt review and revision of the attitudes that are the foundations of skills and the use of knowledge, the learning process will not sustain.
Teachers (whether of children or adults) need to be in a position to identify the learning that is worth offering because the learner trusts then with a time-bound contract to do so. They need to identify and articulate the opportunities that need to be in place for the learner to construct their own learning. For this, they must have great insight into the learner - amongst other things, his or her motivations to learn, in other words into their Self.
Saturday, 25 December 2010
Thursday, 16 December 2010
Confusing Discipline
Discipline is thought of as a natural part of the school environment. Most often it is defined as a set of rules about what is acceptable and what is unacceptable behaviour written by those in authority for those who are not. Even more often, there are a large subset of these rules which are unspoken, unwritten, ambiguous or ill-defined. This latter set, when obeyed leads to what is called 'samajh' (Hindi for understanding). Samajh is defined within the social norms that are relevant to the society in question at that point in time, especially with regard to childhood.
For example, while debate is sanctioned in a classroom, disagreeing with a teacher's judgement, however politely, is considered irreverent or at best, forgiven as being childish. This can be confusing because the same thinking skills encouraged in the first instance are rebuked in the second. While students are may be encouraged to work independently without supervision, become so absorbed in their work that they do not give into distractions; they are considered disrespectful if they do not simultaneously greet every teacher who walks by and not be irritated when a teacher someone older interrupts them for assistance.
Even though the rules, both clear and unclear are communicated to children, the ultimate responsibility for deciding whether behaviour is acceptable or not is placed with a supervisor.
The message to the child is clear. There will always be two sides. One of them is you. The other has control and authority. Your job is to make sure that you do as you are told. Thus, you are never completely responsible for your own actions. Someone else is accountable for your actions and thus for your being responsible or irresponsible.
It can get worse. The message can get extended to mean that if the child gets into trouble, so does his monitor. It is in the nature of a hierarchy. Thus the monitor's motivation to keep the child out of trouble is mainly to keep himself out of trouble. So the monitor and the child can collude and neither can be responsible. What the system successfully avoids doing however, is nurturing a sense of responsibility in the participant ... unless of course he is elected monitor. Thus, reinforcing the idea that hierarchical chains of power are the only the way to avoid anarchy and chaos.
There are simple, long term solutions that avoid or solve the above problems:
Let the rules be created by the participants. Make sure that the rules are not created by the loudest or eldest voice.Ensure that the participants feel the rules are needed. The litmus test is that every participant must stand to lose if the rules are broken. This is what will make self monitoring possible. Let the participants be self monitored. Create an tolerance for, and acceptance for and understanding of peer monitoring. Facilitate it so that it is clear this is not the same as ratting on each other or betrayal, but of each person having the right to protect their own rights, which get violated every time a rule is broken. Until an understanding develops, there could be anonymous ways of reporting the breaking of rules and a discussion of these transgressions in the public forum. Let the rules be clear. Allow time for the rules to be understood. If there is disagreement on what the rules should be, create a forum where every voice can be heard and appreciated. Wait for consensus before a rule is enforced. Consensus does not always mean that every one is ecstatic. It means that everyone agrees that what is decided is the best course of action for the time being and will support it wholeheartedly.Let the consequences for not following the rules be clear. Let them be created by the participants too. Further reading:http://www.nature.com/news/2003/030310/pf/030310-8_pf.html
For example, while debate is sanctioned in a classroom, disagreeing with a teacher's judgement, however politely, is considered irreverent or at best, forgiven as being childish. This can be confusing because the same thinking skills encouraged in the first instance are rebuked in the second. While students are may be encouraged to work independently without supervision, become so absorbed in their work that they do not give into distractions; they are considered disrespectful if they do not simultaneously greet every teacher who walks by and not be irritated when a teacher someone older interrupts them for assistance.
Even though the rules, both clear and unclear are communicated to children, the ultimate responsibility for deciding whether behaviour is acceptable or not is placed with a supervisor.
The message to the child is clear. There will always be two sides. One of them is you. The other has control and authority. Your job is to make sure that you do as you are told. Thus, you are never completely responsible for your own actions. Someone else is accountable for your actions and thus for your being responsible or irresponsible.
It can get worse. The message can get extended to mean that if the child gets into trouble, so does his monitor. It is in the nature of a hierarchy. Thus the monitor's motivation to keep the child out of trouble is mainly to keep himself out of trouble. So the monitor and the child can collude and neither can be responsible. What the system successfully avoids doing however, is nurturing a sense of responsibility in the participant ... unless of course he is elected monitor. Thus, reinforcing the idea that hierarchical chains of power are the only the way to avoid anarchy and chaos.
There are simple, long term solutions that avoid or solve the above problems:
Let the rules be created by the participants. Make sure that the rules are not created by the loudest or eldest voice.Ensure that the participants feel the rules are needed. The litmus test is that every participant must stand to lose if the rules are broken. This is what will make self monitoring possible. Let the participants be self monitored. Create an tolerance for, and acceptance for and understanding of peer monitoring. Facilitate it so that it is clear this is not the same as ratting on each other or betrayal, but of each person having the right to protect their own rights, which get violated every time a rule is broken. Until an understanding develops, there could be anonymous ways of reporting the breaking of rules and a discussion of these transgressions in the public forum. Let the rules be clear. Allow time for the rules to be understood. If there is disagreement on what the rules should be, create a forum where every voice can be heard and appreciated. Wait for consensus before a rule is enforced. Consensus does not always mean that every one is ecstatic. It means that everyone agrees that what is decided is the best course of action for the time being and will support it wholeheartedly.Let the consequences for not following the rules be clear. Let them be created by the participants too. Further reading:http://www.nature.com/news/2003/030310/pf/030310-8_pf.html
Monday, 13 December 2010
School Quality - The Solution Within
Most often the problem holding back quality in a school lies within it. It is so deeply entrenched that weeding it out is not an option. The best one can do is either work around it or change it or acknowledge that until the problem dies its natural death, that there is nothing that can be done to affect quality beyond a point.
When all systems - financial, administrative, logistical, curricular, academic, pedagogic are in place, there comes a time when the issue that is causing the trouble cannot be avoided anymore. The bull must be taken by the horns. The reason for not putting the finger on the problem before this is done, is because it takes all this time for all concerned to admit to the problem. Although the problem is plain to see for the trained eye, very early on in the audit process, all stakeholders need the time and deliberation forced by the changes during the audit to admit to the problem as well as the solution.
Most often there are a few key problems and all other stem from them. It takes about a week's observation at most to establish the possible problems and their solutions. This is the first phase of the education audit. Most clients pay for this first and then sanction a longer plan with timed deliverables wherein the solutions are worked through. The only real deliverable remains that the people decide as they articluate, participate and inquire.
When all systems - financial, administrative, logistical, curricular, academic, pedagogic are in place, there comes a time when the issue that is causing the trouble cannot be avoided anymore. The bull must be taken by the horns. The reason for not putting the finger on the problem before this is done, is because it takes all this time for all concerned to admit to the problem. Although the problem is plain to see for the trained eye, very early on in the audit process, all stakeholders need the time and deliberation forced by the changes during the audit to admit to the problem as well as the solution.
Most often there are a few key problems and all other stem from them. It takes about a week's observation at most to establish the possible problems and their solutions. This is the first phase of the education audit. Most clients pay for this first and then sanction a longer plan with timed deliverables wherein the solutions are worked through. The only real deliverable remains that the people decide as they articluate, participate and inquire.
Sunday, 12 December 2010
Courage, Conviction and Consciousness
Courage, to me, was like a big wide-brush stroke - Intimidating, an immense gesture, diifficult to commit to, larger than life...and of course something I associated only with failure and guilt.Then I saw 'Hotel Rwanda' - the story of a man who does not know he is courageous. He follows one simple rule. He only does what he can live with and does not do what he cannot live with. His actions are not so much the result of lofty ideals but just his effort to remain true to himself. His effort is to stay human. One step at a time, one foot in front of the other, without any more motive but to do what he feels will make it right, do whatever he can, with what he can, for whoever he can. The film starts with a quote that goes something like this: 'When it is all over, you will not remember the harsh words of your enemies, but the silence of your freinds', (Martin Luther King Junior). It makes me wonder about the texture of courage and the double-edged power of acquiescence, the power of one silent voice, the self-knowledge that must be inspired by, the noise that drowns out quietness that it must come from, the courage to face that quiet.
Education: The Construction and Un-Doing of Wonder
For the last two days, I have been attending a workshop. It is being run by an organisation called Jodo Gyan (www.jodogyan.org) for one of the largest players in Education in India. What Jodo Gyan does and what Shahji, one of the principal researchers have been doing is trying to find ways to make Mathematics a relevant experience for children in school. Listening to him and the work of Jodo Gyan, has been an utterly beautiful experience. The joy of seeing an nimble mind in action, humbly but dexterously turning everything you 'know' (have assumed to be true) on its head, without condescending to 'teach' you but just to share an experience or to invite you to explore your own experience, makes for a fascinating learning experience.
I wanted to draw attention to the model of engagement that so many of us have become much more able to articulate but so few of us can pull it off with grace that only comes from compassion and absolute humility. Schools need to become spaces where the mind, the spirit and life can come together to breathe as one. Teachers unfortunately have little or no experience of this themselves, and so facilitators like Shahji make more impact by example than they do by what they teach. If the magic ingredient is being connected to one's own Self enough to find a reflection of the Self in everyone and everything around us (compassion), and thereby be respectful and humble, therefore be open to learning and actually listen to learners for what they know, so the boundaries of what not to teach expand, then the basic ingredient of sustainable, responsive education is spiritual in its core.
At the core of Conscious Living, is to my mind, mindfulness and an acceptance of the possibility that there is an unknown. Classrooms of the future need to be those that encourage this personal reflection and the comfort/awe of being part of an unknown whole.Then, there will be a chance that 'fun' will cease to be an artificial construction supported with transient tools that are produced and instead become reminiscent of childlike wonder. Then, there is a chance that the complex melts away to give way to the simple (what we give special status today and call 'profound').
Institutionalised education systems, the world-over systematically gun for the exact opposite, today with a much more confusing veneer of condescension for the curriculum I am sharing as well as a supposed shedding of the hard-nosed commercialised packaging that they were initially designed for. So now we have a chaotic middle path that brings with it little understanding of the immense vocabulary/jargon that is used to describe it, as well as total lack of skill or courage to actually inquire enough to change it. For me, it has been worth wondering about:What is worth teaching?What is the natural trajectory of learning for children?What is listening?Who is worth listening to?What needs be accepted?
Wednesday, 3 November 2010
Nailing It
With access to so much data and the best people in the system there to provide even more information, I still cannot get a sense of what goes on, at the ground level. If I see the schools that I am shown on the one end of the spectrum and if I ask the questions I know to ask the officials from 15 years of feild experience, I will be successful in stirring up a little more detail. But for a practioner like me, its all too airy fairy.
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Thursday, 12 August 2010
The Simplicity Syndrome
I was at a visioning meeting for a massive organisation yesterday. We were talking about where the organisation would be in the next five years and how it would get there. The feeling around the table was that the company should stick to doing only what is simple, on expansion; because complexity at scale is an invitation for chaos. Here's the question I left with that day. Motivation is a complicated thing, love is, mistrust is, suspicion is...for a revolutionary idea to be scaled up, must it be simple? Is it that transfer of learning is effective when the content is simple or is it when the content is relevant. However complex, if the subject is something one can relate to, isn't it what makes the difference between effective learning and fragmented or rote learning?If the core of lasting and comprehensive learning is that the learner be moved by the content, then it follows, that the learner must allow the his/her Self to get involved with the content. That is the stuff that makes for effective process or pedagogy!The engagement of the Self in the business of learning is unfortunately more often than not, not a priority. Even sadder is that this is mostly because the connection is not seen. Oh there is the regular fare about Value Education and Moral Education, but it translates into tokensim because of the disconnect between the learner, his or her Self, his/her reality and the content. Clearly, there are tools for making this connect, which can be taught, explored, re-invented, devised, adapted; but first must be prioritised as part of the teaching-learning process in school at every level.
Friday, 30 July 2010
Why Education?
What to teach and how has become what I do. I don't really know when it became the only thing I think about and engage with. If I were to think about what gives me joy, I cannot count my concerns about education and the work I do towards resolving those concerns as joyous. Like a writer trapped by his own need to pen his thoughts, I feel compelled by the imperative.
More often than I would like, I am reminded that I have chosen the right profession. I would rather not think so. I wish it were unnecessary and irrelevant. It would mean that there weren't problems that needed fixing. Unfortunately, much more severe, that many other seemingly unrelated social challenges could not be traced back to a poor education system.
I started out wanting to be a psychologist, then needed to get a perspective on the social dimension, thus studied development, then got interested in education as a possible key intervention, then assessment and counseling, finally scaling quality and the question of what is context free and what is context specific. In all honesty, the journey fueled by the vain and adolescent need for approval, and then somewhere became about being able to earn money to survive, then the only skill I had to offer. Unwittingly, because of the sheer breadth of experience - as much as my self confidence would allow - what needs to be done and how began to become clear. It would have become clearer sooner if I had the nerve to allow more experience and to let what I did experience seep in. Alas so little was learnt because I had not learnt to breathe in the life I witnessed. My work has suffered immeasurably because of this.
Setting up a company and an NGO brought on many more decision points where there was but a thin red line between the interests of business and what needed to be done - my financial interests, that of my client and my own. It has become harder as it became clearer that there is always a modicum of choice and therefore cannot be as much place for regret. It has also meant the realisation that the rate at which I am able to implement my skills and experience is limited by the understanding of the variables of impact by the client. Difficult, because the client by virtue of the fact that they need to hire us, is not a position to make an informed choice.
More often than I would like, I am reminded that I have chosen the right profession. I would rather not think so. I wish it were unnecessary and irrelevant. It would mean that there weren't problems that needed fixing. Unfortunately, much more severe, that many other seemingly unrelated social challenges could not be traced back to a poor education system.
I started out wanting to be a psychologist, then needed to get a perspective on the social dimension, thus studied development, then got interested in education as a possible key intervention, then assessment and counseling, finally scaling quality and the question of what is context free and what is context specific. In all honesty, the journey fueled by the vain and adolescent need for approval, and then somewhere became about being able to earn money to survive, then the only skill I had to offer. Unwittingly, because of the sheer breadth of experience - as much as my self confidence would allow - what needs to be done and how began to become clear. It would have become clearer sooner if I had the nerve to allow more experience and to let what I did experience seep in. Alas so little was learnt because I had not learnt to breathe in the life I witnessed. My work has suffered immeasurably because of this.
Setting up a company and an NGO brought on many more decision points where there was but a thin red line between the interests of business and what needed to be done - my financial interests, that of my client and my own. It has become harder as it became clearer that there is always a modicum of choice and therefore cannot be as much place for regret. It has also meant the realisation that the rate at which I am able to implement my skills and experience is limited by the understanding of the variables of impact by the client. Difficult, because the client by virtue of the fact that they need to hire us, is not a position to make an informed choice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)