Steve writes:
> Breivik clearly stated that "risk" was NOT a workable
> concept!!!! This was because it was too full of cultural
> "stuff". So in this context we have again many questions
> to ask ourselves.
Thanks, Steve, for summarising Breivik's 10 year study in 2
sentences. But before arriving at questions we can ask ourselves
(which is what you suggest) we first need to ask some questions
about this study!
For example, I believe there are many concepts that are
_extremely_ ''full of cultural stuff'' and that are ALSO
''workable concepts'' e.g. person, relationships, intelligence,
leadership, management, learning, development ... etc. etc.
On the other hand, if you strip concepts (too much) out of their
cultural context you are left with skeletal concepts that need
bringing back to life somewhere further down the line to make
them ''workable''. The difficulty I would have in studying risk
in isolation is that risk does not exist in isolation.
If we are to abandon a discussion about risk because the concept
is not ''workable'' then what more ''workable'' concept (or
concepts) should we be replacing it with?
Does ''workability'' not simply depend of the (research) paradigm
from which the concept is viewed?
I am sure Steve did not want us to leave this ''unworkable''
concept alone and abandon this discussion about risk.
What I especially like about ''risk'' is the support that it can
generate. Feeling strong support and encouragement from others
meets a more basic need (in Maslow's terms) than the need for new
experiences. Creating and using support is a life skill and
leadership skill that is highly transferable.
Cheri was suggesting that we look wider at what gets transferred
from ''appropriate risks''. This included looking at how risk
generates faith/trust in the support group. (Support for learning
about things other than risk?)
I have suggested looking wider still at the role of risk in the
learning cycle itself (and learning to learn). 'Active
Experimentation' is one of the four poles in Kolb's theory of
experiential learning. If we regard 'Active Experimentation' as
risk, then risk (according to Kolb's theory at least) is an
essential feature of learning.
So is Kolb's theory of experiential learning based on an
unworkable concept?
Roger Greenaway
Reviewing Skills Training
[log in to unmask]
http://reviewing.co.uk
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|