I’m just kind of curious as to how other people feel about the relationship that should exist between a teacher and a student. I know that in my experience in high school, the classes where I felt like a friend to the teacher were the classes I was most comfortable in and was more interested in what the teacher had to say. The only problems that arise from this is that there is a line between a teacher and a student that varies from student to student and teacher to teach that exists. Also its difficult maybe impossible to act as a friend toward all the students in a class and the teacher may be seen as having favorites.
I think the students should choose their level of involvement, and that the teacher should make sure that the option is there. Students should be able to trust teachers, if something is wrong with their home and they aren’t comfortable to talk to a teacher because of the authorities boundary that is usually there, then that student could have a lot of difficulties.
Also I think that from a critical pedagogy standpoint, a conversation is easier among friends. So should we as teachers be conscience of the relationships and bonds we form with our students? As I said earlier I’m just curious as to where other people stand on this.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Post of CP past
I was just thinking back to CPI with Haltmeier and Remembered writing on the blog whenever you saw something interesting or had an idea about something that came up during class. Thinking about that made me realize how much it felt like discussions about interesting topics and also it felt like a community. Just going to blog with something and then people talking about it, transforming it, picking it apart, and coming up with something new to think about. Also I think its so cool that it all took place on the Internet. We didn't have to agree on a time and place to meet to have these discussions, they took place at our convenence Then when we did get together, the ideas that came up could be backed up in person with all the energy and positive attitudes that environment brings out. So in thinking of all this I thought: why not? So I'm posting now and asking if anyone else remembers that? Maybe we can just have discussions on here at some point where we're just killing time. However, will this mess up the 1 blog per week count? Or could this just kind of take place in the background of the 500 word blogs?
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Tums Can't Fix an Ulcer
For years, I thought I had grown up in a community that was healthy, supportive, and looking to move forward. I was convinced that my hometown was a safe place for me to grow and make mistakes. After reading chapter two of Block’s text, my thoughts are beginning to shift in a new direction. Is any average community in this day really trying to provide an environment that allows each individual to succeed?
Block proves a very good point in chapter two, when he says that communities find ways to treat the symptoms of what are actually much deeper problems. We come up with ways, as a community, to make educational distractions from the problems at hand. Instead of creating solutions for the issues, we tend to cover them and almost pretend that they do not exist. Recreational sports, for example, simply cannot be the solution to underage drinking or gang violence. However, they turn heads into a positive direction, taking the focus off much more serious, deeper issues. (And all this time I thought I was just enjoying soccer!)
Another example I find that portrays this point is the transformation at the Clermont Counseling Center. Once the focus turned away from the patients’ problems, they began to take part in the production of the Center. They started to feel like citizens and not patients. Each individual performed tasks that fit with their strengths. Once this happened, things began running very smoothly and there was a large shift in dynamic at the newly named Center- Phoenix Place.
With things looking this positive, I thought the community had changed for good. As I continued reading, I saw the unfortunate news that the community began to move back to its old ways while other people around them changed positions. When what seemed like a perfect community had other factors thrown into it, it almost cracked and lost its strength. This shows just how complicated and almost unrealistic the idea of a perfect community is. Although they had found places to turn, the issues were still hidden inside. Putting the patients in leadership positions did not change the fact that they were still in need of help. They were treating the symptoms, but were unable to fully resolve any actual issues.
Another idea that is similar to treating the symptoms of a community is discussed in chapter three of the text. Block suggests that communities only take action to limit fear. For example, when a city first experiences a dramatic increase in crimes over a period of time, the mayor will sit down with his/her board members and create a plan of action. One simple ‘solution’ is to build a jail or a prison close by and add more local police officers on duty. Even though a holding place for these dangerous people has been built, the issue of people having the mindset to commit a crime still exists and needs to be addressed.
Most school systems now have to practice mandatory lockdown procedures to keep the students, teachers, and faculty safe in the event of an emergency. If a school is in an area where real lockdowns happen frequently, having this procedure can make members of this community feel safe. Although they are necessary for safety, lockdowns do not eliminate the behaviors that cause them to happen in the first place. The issue at hand is the person doing the action, not the outcome of their actions. If we created communities that focused on the bigger issue and not how to treat the symptoms, these actions would not even come to mind.
Block proves a very good point in chapter two, when he says that communities find ways to treat the symptoms of what are actually much deeper problems. We come up with ways, as a community, to make educational distractions from the problems at hand. Instead of creating solutions for the issues, we tend to cover them and almost pretend that they do not exist. Recreational sports, for example, simply cannot be the solution to underage drinking or gang violence. However, they turn heads into a positive direction, taking the focus off much more serious, deeper issues. (And all this time I thought I was just enjoying soccer!)
Another example I find that portrays this point is the transformation at the Clermont Counseling Center. Once the focus turned away from the patients’ problems, they began to take part in the production of the Center. They started to feel like citizens and not patients. Each individual performed tasks that fit with their strengths. Once this happened, things began running very smoothly and there was a large shift in dynamic at the newly named Center- Phoenix Place.
With things looking this positive, I thought the community had changed for good. As I continued reading, I saw the unfortunate news that the community began to move back to its old ways while other people around them changed positions. When what seemed like a perfect community had other factors thrown into it, it almost cracked and lost its strength. This shows just how complicated and almost unrealistic the idea of a perfect community is. Although they had found places to turn, the issues were still hidden inside. Putting the patients in leadership positions did not change the fact that they were still in need of help. They were treating the symptoms, but were unable to fully resolve any actual issues.
Another idea that is similar to treating the symptoms of a community is discussed in chapter three of the text. Block suggests that communities only take action to limit fear. For example, when a city first experiences a dramatic increase in crimes over a period of time, the mayor will sit down with his/her board members and create a plan of action. One simple ‘solution’ is to build a jail or a prison close by and add more local police officers on duty. Even though a holding place for these dangerous people has been built, the issue of people having the mindset to commit a crime still exists and needs to be addressed.
Most school systems now have to practice mandatory lockdown procedures to keep the students, teachers, and faculty safe in the event of an emergency. If a school is in an area where real lockdowns happen frequently, having this procedure can make members of this community feel safe. Although they are necessary for safety, lockdowns do not eliminate the behaviors that cause them to happen in the first place. The issue at hand is the person doing the action, not the outcome of their actions. If we created communities that focused on the bigger issue and not how to treat the symptoms, these actions would not even come to mind.
media, marketing fear and fault
Our last class we were discussing points in the reading that caught our interest for good and bad reasons. A few things that caught my attention were marketing fear and fault and ramping up laws and oversights. In society today, the media has a huge impact in the way our communities act, feel and think. Unfortunately, the media has no conscience and prides themselves on delivering the drama despite of what the impact could be on a community. Thus, a vicious circle of life. I do not entirely blame the media for the communities behavior towards violence, terrorism, immigrants, people from other cultures or religions, and the poor and uneducated. The fear is a bi-product of the community believing everything they hear on the tele or in the newspaper. In order for the community to have fear, they have to believe that things are fearful.
Fear in the community also brings about the need for safety and the rules and regulations created to acheive that. Fear is so deep in the hearts of people these days that rules have been established on a national level. These rules are setup in the interest of communities nationwide. The reality is that the rules that have been established have been bent and/or broken to keep the people in fear. Keeping the people in fear keeps the leaders in power which is the opposite of what a community is and needs to be. Leaders in a community are not what they should be.
A community does not always need a leader but if there is a group of people leading the direction of transformation in the group, then I think a so called leader is a key aspect to the community. Keep in mind that a community should have everyone contributing to the whole, and not let the group of leaders take control of everything.
Along with fear comes fault. Everyones favorite thing is the blame game. Who is to blame for things happening. I agree with Peter Block when he says " if we can assign blame and find cause, then it is useful to society and reassures us that it will not happen again. This is irrational thinking."(Block 38-39) I completely agree. He mentions that after the person at fault is found a change in policy or legislature will make sure that it will not occur again. This is not usually the case, because like Ryan said, "what works in one community may not work for another"(LaBoy).
The changes in legislature have resulted in some of the most absurd laws I have ever heard. Allow me to explain, poor people being issued liscenses to say they are poor. That is equally as bad as racial profiling only its income profiling. An assumption that if a person is governmentally issued to be poor and ask for money makes the streets safer is rediculous. Putting a lable on someone before you know the situation at hand is a huge problem. It seems that people would rather work to solve a problem than find the answer to the problem and then change to accomodate the needs of the answer. The communities then have a reason to shut out individuals rather than help the individuals get back on their feet. This is not how a community should work in order to feel 'safe'.
Fear in the community also brings about the need for safety and the rules and regulations created to acheive that. Fear is so deep in the hearts of people these days that rules have been established on a national level. These rules are setup in the interest of communities nationwide. The reality is that the rules that have been established have been bent and/or broken to keep the people in fear. Keeping the people in fear keeps the leaders in power which is the opposite of what a community is and needs to be. Leaders in a community are not what they should be.
A community does not always need a leader but if there is a group of people leading the direction of transformation in the group, then I think a so called leader is a key aspect to the community. Keep in mind that a community should have everyone contributing to the whole, and not let the group of leaders take control of everything.
Along with fear comes fault. Everyones favorite thing is the blame game. Who is to blame for things happening. I agree with Peter Block when he says " if we can assign blame and find cause, then it is useful to society and reassures us that it will not happen again. This is irrational thinking."(Block 38-39) I completely agree. He mentions that after the person at fault is found a change in policy or legislature will make sure that it will not occur again. This is not usually the case, because like Ryan said, "what works in one community may not work for another"(LaBoy).
The changes in legislature have resulted in some of the most absurd laws I have ever heard. Allow me to explain, poor people being issued liscenses to say they are poor. That is equally as bad as racial profiling only its income profiling. An assumption that if a person is governmentally issued to be poor and ask for money makes the streets safer is rediculous. Putting a lable on someone before you know the situation at hand is a huge problem. It seems that people would rather work to solve a problem than find the answer to the problem and then change to accomodate the needs of the answer. The communities then have a reason to shut out individuals rather than help the individuals get back on their feet. This is not how a community should work in order to feel 'safe'.
Transformation
This week’s discussion left me thinking a lot about the negative aspects of a community. It might actually be more accurate to label these particular aspects as ones that seem to suppress a community’s growth rather than aid in its advancement. Negative might be too strong of a term to use when discussing certain community characteristics because it doesn’t lend a helping hand to the idea of change or transformation. Through the readings and our discussion, however, I have come to the conclusion that transformation is exactly what is needed.
When I say that transformation is the key, I don’t mean it in the sense that all communities must undergo a complete change from their current state. I view the expression as a way of defining the ability to take what is already in existence and allow it to evolve into something that is progressive and beneficial.
I agree with Block when he states that a “community is fundamentally an interdependent human system given form by the conversation it holds with itself” (pg 30). I like the phrase “interdependent human system” because it emphasizes the necessity for individuals to come together and work as a unit. Rather than having one leader to follow, each person within the community holds a sense of accountability. Last week, I wrote a lot about the need for social capital and the idea that it is the connective tissue that holds a community together. While I still believe this to be the case, it now needs to be expanded upon. If we were to say that social capital already exists in a particular community and each person agrees that they are accountable for its happenings, then the next step is to begin a conversation. This conversation is what can undergo transformation before any action is put into motion. Block states, “The shift in conversation is from one of problems, fears, and retribution to one of possibility, generosity, and restoration” (pg 31).
I do agree that society at large is one that likes to seek change by fixing problems rather than focusing on the positive or building upon potential. People become involved only when they are angry about something or when they are directly affected in a negative way. Rather than focus on the symptoms, we need to transform our way of thinking and focus on the actual infection, not its side effects. In doing so, we allow for an alternative future to be possible. Simply putting a band-aid over a wound does not heal it nor does it stop the wound from coming back again. If we shift the conversation from one of problems to possibilities, the core of what is needed within a community can be exposed.
While it is important to transform the conversation into one that can be viewed in a positive light, it is crucial that we realize who is conversing in the first place. We live in a world where our leaders are held in high esteem and we look to them to dictate what occurs within the community. We are happy with this leader until he/she does us wrong. Then, individuals typically become angry and blame their anger on the leader’s poor choices. This “gives us someone to blame and thereby declares our innocence” (pg 41). Having leaders can be a great thing, especially if it is one entrusted by the people, but communities must transform their way of thinking and realize that they, too, hold power. A leader takes a way the sense of accountability and gives all the power to one person. One person can never have more insight into what a community needs than the individuals that live in it every day. Collective effort will allow for the greatest amount of change and advancement.
After reading “The Conductor as Transformational Leader,” by Susan Armstrong and Scott Armstrong, it opened my eyes to the connection between community and the classroom. The article discusses the characteristics of a music conductor that allow for the greatest amount of transformation amongst its students. Armstrong and Armstrong both discuss the need for a conductor to be enthusiastic, able to share his/her vision, be a behavioral model, empowering, and encouraging. They specifically use the word “enabler” as opposed to a “dictator.” I found this very interesting because although Block’s book discusses community and the article discusses teaching, the characteristics of both are extremely similar. This only helped to solidify my idea that the classroom is its own community and that as an educator, it is important to apply certain community elements in the classroom. The application of particular ideas can create transformation within the community and classroom alike.
possibilities
All too often music teachers are led to believe that performance encompasses the only priority by which we teach. Unfortunately for most of our secondary or elementary aged students, they could not care less about performance in our society. Forced by politicians, school board members, principals and parents to reap benefits quickly, many teachers struggle to balance how much students learn with how often they perform. Numerous times in my own classroom experiences as a student, the class often felt a negative energy or vibe for not performing up to par. I think it's natural for an ensemble to break out of the caged formality of education to want to have fun. Number one, this is evidence that the teacher is doing a good job. The very meaning of the word ensemble, a group viewed as a whole rather than individuality, denotes that there must be a common bond. Good ensembles value their time for fun just as much as their work time. Peter Block acknowledges these facts within his book, "Community: the structure of belonging". On page 53, he mentions that "our conversations and gatherings have the power to shift the context from retributive community to restorative community." In a group, punishment normally has a hypnotizing affect that could put the energy of a group in jeopardy. When music educators build restorative communities, music educators build an ensemble which looks at problems together and takes control of the situation itself.
For example, a group of high school students hope to travel to Disney World to participate as a performance ensemble in one of the major parks, visible to many tourists. The fun involved with the preparation for this trip was tangible throughout the group, yet they knew that the one performance they had meant everything. About a month before the trip, the group found out that one of their basses would not be coming on the trip due to monetary issues and concerns. Most of the students had raised enough money through the annual candy sale and program advertisements. However this particular student could not come up with the final few dollars to pay for the trip. In the end the director had told the student privately that he was not allowed on the trip. The ensemble had heard of the situation and pooled together some of their own money to pay off the rest of the bass's trip.
In Lynn Brinckmeyer's article called, "Possibilities", she makes an important Reimer-like statement which struck my fancy: "We may struggle to discover the beauty in some of our students or colleagues who approach life with different value systems than ours. Can you think of a student who doesn't fit neatly in society? Most likely that one needs our appreciation even more than those who are attractive by society's standards."
In the example above, we see a community coming together to rally for a cause. There are so many negative routes the ensemble could have taken that would have excommunicated the bass student from a wonderful trip to Disney. Likewise, the teacher also could have enforced that the student be kept off the trip therefore loosening the feeling of ensemble and diminishing the upbeat energy the students had as a group. While the performance would have gone on with or without the student, one can see a general outpouring of care for the ensemble and its members as a whole.
For example, a group of high school students hope to travel to Disney World to participate as a performance ensemble in one of the major parks, visible to many tourists. The fun involved with the preparation for this trip was tangible throughout the group, yet they knew that the one performance they had meant everything. About a month before the trip, the group found out that one of their basses would not be coming on the trip due to monetary issues and concerns. Most of the students had raised enough money through the annual candy sale and program advertisements. However this particular student could not come up with the final few dollars to pay for the trip. In the end the director had told the student privately that he was not allowed on the trip. The ensemble had heard of the situation and pooled together some of their own money to pay off the rest of the bass's trip.
In Lynn Brinckmeyer's article called, "Possibilities", she makes an important Reimer-like statement which struck my fancy: "We may struggle to discover the beauty in some of our students or colleagues who approach life with different value systems than ours. Can you think of a student who doesn't fit neatly in society? Most likely that one needs our appreciation even more than those who are attractive by society's standards."
In the example above, we see a community coming together to rally for a cause. There are so many negative routes the ensemble could have taken that would have excommunicated the bass student from a wonderful trip to Disney. Likewise, the teacher also could have enforced that the student be kept off the trip therefore loosening the feeling of ensemble and diminishing the upbeat energy the students had as a group. While the performance would have gone on with or without the student, one can see a general outpouring of care for the ensemble and its members as a whole.
Leaders Cannot Be a Community
The concept of a leader has multiple roles. Some of these roles are truly necessities that come along with being a leader and others are polluted roles that seem to simply please the public.
The key principles that every leader needs to follow is that of serving. A leadership role is not something a person should do if they have this romanticized idea that being a leader will allow him or herself to get gain in the sight of people. If a person sees himself or herself as a servant than this preconceived notion that a leader is greater, superior, or more important than others is put away. In thinking that one is a servant to the public, it allows a leader to know that it is hard work for others. It is not to say that the leader does not gain from it. Block puts light into this subject when he explains that people in leadership roles are still part of the community. In serving the community, he or she is also serving him or herself.
A slightly polluted concept of leadership is the concept that a leader has more responsibility than others. It is true that a leader has more responsibility, but this distorts the image of what the public’s roles are. The pollution lies in that a leader takes all the blame for failure in the community. The idea that the leader takes part of the blame is acceptable, but if it was someone else that did not uphold on his part, than there should be a shared sense of blame. Just as we were discussing along the lines of gifts last week, every person no matter their status, has a responsibility to the community in some capacity. There is a need to realize that a great leader cannot make everyone accomplish his or her roles. The romanticized idea is that a leader solely has the power to change a community for the better. A great leader can encourage and motivate others to do their part, but the lesson to learn is that a leader cannot take away a person’s will to accomplish his or her part.
This leads me to think on the concept of symptoms as well. If a community fails, then it is the leader that is criticized. But what is the real problem? “It [blaming only the leaders] undermines a culture where each is accountable for their community” (Block 41). A bad leader is merely an outside symptom of what is not going on in the community. The real problem lies when the members of the community do not have a sense of ownership of their own community. The people want the benefit of a great community, but the truth is that anything worth obtaining in a community comes from the whole community’s diligence and contribution.
The key principles that every leader needs to follow is that of serving. A leadership role is not something a person should do if they have this romanticized idea that being a leader will allow him or herself to get gain in the sight of people. If a person sees himself or herself as a servant than this preconceived notion that a leader is greater, superior, or more important than others is put away. In thinking that one is a servant to the public, it allows a leader to know that it is hard work for others. It is not to say that the leader does not gain from it. Block puts light into this subject when he explains that people in leadership roles are still part of the community. In serving the community, he or she is also serving him or herself.
A slightly polluted concept of leadership is the concept that a leader has more responsibility than others. It is true that a leader has more responsibility, but this distorts the image of what the public’s roles are. The pollution lies in that a leader takes all the blame for failure in the community. The idea that the leader takes part of the blame is acceptable, but if it was someone else that did not uphold on his part, than there should be a shared sense of blame. Just as we were discussing along the lines of gifts last week, every person no matter their status, has a responsibility to the community in some capacity. There is a need to realize that a great leader cannot make everyone accomplish his or her roles. The romanticized idea is that a leader solely has the power to change a community for the better. A great leader can encourage and motivate others to do their part, but the lesson to learn is that a leader cannot take away a person’s will to accomplish his or her part.
This leads me to think on the concept of symptoms as well. If a community fails, then it is the leader that is criticized. But what is the real problem? “It [blaming only the leaders] undermines a culture where each is accountable for their community” (Block 41). A bad leader is merely an outside symptom of what is not going on in the community. The real problem lies when the members of the community do not have a sense of ownership of their own community. The people want the benefit of a great community, but the truth is that anything worth obtaining in a community comes from the whole community’s diligence and contribution.
Possibility and Accountability
After reading chapters two through four, I found "possibility" and "accountability" to be the most striking and important concepts that are necessary to changing a community. Block says that in order for us to bring about change in the community, we have to first identify the context of our community, change the thoughts and dialogues among citizens, and then produce a new context or worldview for the community to live in. At first glance, I thought this idea of changing context was daunting and improbable, but I think through the concepts of possibility and accountability, a community can change for the better.
I believe it makes a huge difference when a community focuses on possibilities rather than problems. Dealing with problems automatically sets up a negative undertone in a community and it limits our thoughts and options to create change. Solving problems is just a temporary quick-fix, and it doesn't guarantee lasting results or prevent the problem from occurring again. Therefore, if a community looks through the eyes of possibility, the horizon of opportunities widens. Citizens see that the community is working through positivity and possibility, and I think they will be more willing to be involved in the process of change. As a result, the old context of problems is eliminated and through conversation, a new context of possibility arises.
The only way for change to occur is if everyone in the community is accountable for their actions. Accountability means that citizens are motivated and responsible enough to contribute and make changes to the society. Accountability is also the idea that a community does not depend on its leader to do all the work. The leader does not have complete control over the community, and the citizens have a voice in decision making and in this process of change. They have equal importance in the community, because we want citizens who know that they can create change themselves if they are willing to put in the work.
This idea of "unromantizing leadership" reminds me of a concept in Critical Pedagogy. The CP model supports the idea that learning takes place when there is a conversation between the student and the teacher. In the same way, a leader and citizens of a community need to engage in conversations for effective changes to occur. Critical Pedagogy says that there needs to be a shift in power structure by acknowledging the fact that students come to a classroom with their own knowledge and experiences. Likewise, the shift in power also needs to happen in a community, because the citizens have thoughts, opinions, and ideas that can fuel and ignite change.
I find the ideas of possibility and accountability extremely useful, because these concepts relate to my life. As the leader of a community service organization, I want members who are not only passionate about service, but who are actively engaged to better the effectiveness of our club. Accountability occurs when members offer projects to attend, contribute to the planning and execution of events, and contribute to the whole of the group. In turn, I will value the members' gifts and ideas, so that their roles are important within the club. In the end we will all be proud of our accomplishments and have paved the way for a better future. The concepts of possibility and accountability have a great deal of influence in any community.
I believe it makes a huge difference when a community focuses on possibilities rather than problems. Dealing with problems automatically sets up a negative undertone in a community and it limits our thoughts and options to create change. Solving problems is just a temporary quick-fix, and it doesn't guarantee lasting results or prevent the problem from occurring again. Therefore, if a community looks through the eyes of possibility, the horizon of opportunities widens. Citizens see that the community is working through positivity and possibility, and I think they will be more willing to be involved in the process of change. As a result, the old context of problems is eliminated and through conversation, a new context of possibility arises.
The only way for change to occur is if everyone in the community is accountable for their actions. Accountability means that citizens are motivated and responsible enough to contribute and make changes to the society. Accountability is also the idea that a community does not depend on its leader to do all the work. The leader does not have complete control over the community, and the citizens have a voice in decision making and in this process of change. They have equal importance in the community, because we want citizens who know that they can create change themselves if they are willing to put in the work.
This idea of "unromantizing leadership" reminds me of a concept in Critical Pedagogy. The CP model supports the idea that learning takes place when there is a conversation between the student and the teacher. In the same way, a leader and citizens of a community need to engage in conversations for effective changes to occur. Critical Pedagogy says that there needs to be a shift in power structure by acknowledging the fact that students come to a classroom with their own knowledge and experiences. Likewise, the shift in power also needs to happen in a community, because the citizens have thoughts, opinions, and ideas that can fuel and ignite change.
I find the ideas of possibility and accountability extremely useful, because these concepts relate to my life. As the leader of a community service organization, I want members who are not only passionate about service, but who are actively engaged to better the effectiveness of our club. Accountability occurs when members offer projects to attend, contribute to the planning and execution of events, and contribute to the whole of the group. In turn, I will value the members' gifts and ideas, so that their roles are important within the club. In the end we will all be proud of our accomplishments and have paved the way for a better future. The concepts of possibility and accountability have a great deal of influence in any community.
What community?
Chapters 2 – 4 seemed to deal heavily with problems a community face and how to address them. I believe that all of the ideas that Block brings up are very good, solid ideas. I only think that what Block expects out of a community is just asking too much. Also it is difficult and almost impossible to say that they will work in any community. Also it is difficult to gauge what difficulties these ideas will have based on the size of a community.
I really enjoyed the example of the hospital because it shows how the methods of this book can have a positive implication in the real world. It is difficult to grasp however, the proper scale to which these methods can work. In one hospital with willing members it worked great. In an urban town where most of the people interacting there during the day don’t actually live there and whose members are not interested communal growth how effective can these ideas be?
In one of the sections Block talks about how it is important to gather people together in order to have the conversations that bring about possibility and change. What good is knocking down a tree if no one is around to hear it? Also this brings up the point about leadership. Block says the ones who dominate a conversation are the ones who talk most strongly about problems and can complain and argue the best. Who is to gather people? Ones who attract attention in this negative way enough to get people together? How willing can community members be about changing the conversation unless they’re intrigued by everything that is wrong? I feel this creates a very difficult environment to initiate positive change in a community.
A big topic in the chapters was media. I thought it was very interesting how he talked about the media controls what is perceived about a community. It’s commonplace to say that the media only puts out stories to serve its own ends but I never thought of the implications that those stories have on the perception of that community. It even scared me a little to think that I didn’t even consider that the communities in the news didn’t have anything good to offer. Even when I would see local news about my own area all I could think was “wow that place is pretty messed up.” Just to have the idea that there was the possibility that even though what story is being told doesn’t represent a whole picture, my perception of media changed. It’s a good example of how changing the conversation can change thoughts, which change practices and routines. It’s a small example of Block’s ideas at work.
I really enjoyed the example of the hospital because it shows how the methods of this book can have a positive implication in the real world. It is difficult to grasp however, the proper scale to which these methods can work. In one hospital with willing members it worked great. In an urban town where most of the people interacting there during the day don’t actually live there and whose members are not interested communal growth how effective can these ideas be?
In one of the sections Block talks about how it is important to gather people together in order to have the conversations that bring about possibility and change. What good is knocking down a tree if no one is around to hear it? Also this brings up the point about leadership. Block says the ones who dominate a conversation are the ones who talk most strongly about problems and can complain and argue the best. Who is to gather people? Ones who attract attention in this negative way enough to get people together? How willing can community members be about changing the conversation unless they’re intrigued by everything that is wrong? I feel this creates a very difficult environment to initiate positive change in a community.
A big topic in the chapters was media. I thought it was very interesting how he talked about the media controls what is perceived about a community. It’s commonplace to say that the media only puts out stories to serve its own ends but I never thought of the implications that those stories have on the perception of that community. It even scared me a little to think that I didn’t even consider that the communities in the news didn’t have anything good to offer. Even when I would see local news about my own area all I could think was “wow that place is pretty messed up.” Just to have the idea that there was the possibility that even though what story is being told doesn’t represent a whole picture, my perception of media changed. It’s a good example of how changing the conversation can change thoughts, which change practices and routines. It’s a small example of Block’s ideas at work.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
For Profit, or Not-For-Profit?
In reading the Block this week, as expressed in class, I found the contradictory nature of his writing to be offensive. Block advocates the change in perception from deficiencies to gifts, and quite passionately so, yet he seems to completely negate this ideal when he devotes a whole chapter to the dysfunction of society at large (Chapter 3: The Stuck Community).
After class, I kept asking myself why I was so offended by his writing. Looking back on it, I think I was so offended because I felt personally attacked, and to a certain extent rightfully so. I suppose, to his credit, however, this shows Block's power as an author to personalize his writing. As I said in class, and again stress since giving the reading a second look, I do believe Block has some intriguing and genius ideas in this chapter.
I think one of the most compelling points he raises in this chapter is the misnaming of not-for-profit organizations. Sure, the title refers to monetary gain, or a lack thereof, but in some stretch of the word it also implies a complete lack of gain. I guess this really just comes down to one's definition of "profit." Not-for-profits create a huge amount of social capital and social fabric, and serve as catalysts to associational life. So, why is it then that these organizations are called "not-for-profits"? Unfortunately, the reality is many communities do calculate success based on the dollar sign attached to the front of a figure. So, how does one retain the integrity of these organizations? Simple. Change the name. This is a perfect example of how language can empower and encourage a thriving community.
Another point worth mentioning is the lack of identity found in the label associated with not-for-profit organizations. Block conceptualizes this idea brilliantly when he suggests people introduce themselves as who they’re NOT. This lack of identity within the volunteer community leads to a breakdown of associational life that, in the mindset of Block, would throw a community into regression.
Another interesting idea about associational life is the notion that volunteerism is a distant contribution. Distant in the sense that one is not required to immerse one’s full self into it. Sure, it’s nice to help out, but at the end of the day we all go back to our happy-go-lucky lives while for some the oppression we volunteered to alleviate, if only during the course of a warm meal, is a constant reality of which there seems to be no escape. I guess this also ties into the idea of volunteerism as solving (or sustaining) symptoms not the problems. So is volunteerism as great as it seems? Or is it a way for the fortunate citizens of a community to feel less guilty about their success. Does it become a moral obligation?
Congruently, running with this notion of volunteerism as a handicap of community, Block states in the his book that it is our current understanding the more social programs a community has the weaker it is perceived to be. So where does volunteerism become a crutch of society? I was always under the impression that one could not volunteer enough. I suppose it is all about the manner in which you volunteer. There’s a saying, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” So, where does one stop feeding and start fishing?
All in all, I think volunteerism can serve as a great asset to a community, as does Block. But in stating the negative mindset, Block leads me to think, “How much is too much? When should one be expected to help one’s self?” I know that in this class we’re talking all about the unity of a commUNITY, but where, if at any point, should one be held accountable for his/her actions? Is volunteerism really just a form of coddling? I like to believe it is not, but Block raises a very interesting point.
After class, I kept asking myself why I was so offended by his writing. Looking back on it, I think I was so offended because I felt personally attacked, and to a certain extent rightfully so. I suppose, to his credit, however, this shows Block's power as an author to personalize his writing. As I said in class, and again stress since giving the reading a second look, I do believe Block has some intriguing and genius ideas in this chapter.
I think one of the most compelling points he raises in this chapter is the misnaming of not-for-profit organizations. Sure, the title refers to monetary gain, or a lack thereof, but in some stretch of the word it also implies a complete lack of gain. I guess this really just comes down to one's definition of "profit." Not-for-profits create a huge amount of social capital and social fabric, and serve as catalysts to associational life. So, why is it then that these organizations are called "not-for-profits"? Unfortunately, the reality is many communities do calculate success based on the dollar sign attached to the front of a figure. So, how does one retain the integrity of these organizations? Simple. Change the name. This is a perfect example of how language can empower and encourage a thriving community.
Another point worth mentioning is the lack of identity found in the label associated with not-for-profit organizations. Block conceptualizes this idea brilliantly when he suggests people introduce themselves as who they’re NOT. This lack of identity within the volunteer community leads to a breakdown of associational life that, in the mindset of Block, would throw a community into regression.
Another interesting idea about associational life is the notion that volunteerism is a distant contribution. Distant in the sense that one is not required to immerse one’s full self into it. Sure, it’s nice to help out, but at the end of the day we all go back to our happy-go-lucky lives while for some the oppression we volunteered to alleviate, if only during the course of a warm meal, is a constant reality of which there seems to be no escape. I guess this also ties into the idea of volunteerism as solving (or sustaining) symptoms not the problems. So is volunteerism as great as it seems? Or is it a way for the fortunate citizens of a community to feel less guilty about their success. Does it become a moral obligation?
Congruently, running with this notion of volunteerism as a handicap of community, Block states in the his book that it is our current understanding the more social programs a community has the weaker it is perceived to be. So where does volunteerism become a crutch of society? I was always under the impression that one could not volunteer enough. I suppose it is all about the manner in which you volunteer. There’s a saying, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” So, where does one stop feeding and start fishing?
All in all, I think volunteerism can serve as a great asset to a community, as does Block. But in stating the negative mindset, Block leads me to think, “How much is too much? When should one be expected to help one’s self?” I know that in this class we’re talking all about the unity of a commUNITY, but where, if at any point, should one be held accountable for his/her actions? Is volunteerism really just a form of coddling? I like to believe it is not, but Block raises a very interesting point.
Restorative community
In Chapter 4, it talks about a community that was willing to connect with each other as a community. How much are we willing to adapt or connect with each other? It can make a huge impact on one's community. Of course it would take a period of time to trust and feel comfortable to be in the community. However, I believe it all depends on how much restorative mind you have, and how much you care about it.
In my experience, when I first came to America, I felt disconnected with the place I lived. Of course it can be a cultural shock. However, I was willing to belong in the community, even though I felt awkward and uncomfortable. What I started doing was observe people, the way of they spoke when they had conversations, the type of clothes they wore, their general philosophical views. I think when you really pay attention to what you hear, and what you see, one day you will realize it on your own, and will feel belonging in the community.
If someone feels isolated from the community even they have been living there for a long period of the time. That means maybe they do not trust the people in the community or not really paying attention to the environment around them or they have a tendency to refuse to accept the environment they have and is not willing to connect with others. It took me at least 5 years to feel comfortable living in America and to feel belonging here. However in order to belonging in one's community, it is not only time that is required. It is how much restorative mind you have and how much ability you have to adapt to different environments.
Moreover, you may not love and trust everyone in your community. If you are, that's a lie. Trusting everyone in your community might be a little different approach than belonging into group. However, trusting someone is a great influence to the community. If we are willing to trust each other, then we will have a better understanding of other cultures and be able to adapt it. I believe in order to make a strong bond with each other, we should be willing to trust each other and be willing to understand each other and that would make our community a better place to live.
In my experience, when I first came to America, I felt disconnected with the place I lived. Of course it can be a cultural shock. However, I was willing to belong in the community, even though I felt awkward and uncomfortable. What I started doing was observe people, the way of they spoke when they had conversations, the type of clothes they wore, their general philosophical views. I think when you really pay attention to what you hear, and what you see, one day you will realize it on your own, and will feel belonging in the community.
If someone feels isolated from the community even they have been living there for a long period of the time. That means maybe they do not trust the people in the community or not really paying attention to the environment around them or they have a tendency to refuse to accept the environment they have and is not willing to connect with others. It took me at least 5 years to feel comfortable living in America and to feel belonging here. However in order to belonging in one's community, it is not only time that is required. It is how much restorative mind you have and how much ability you have to adapt to different environments.
Moreover, you may not love and trust everyone in your community. If you are, that's a lie. Trusting everyone in your community might be a little different approach than belonging into group. However, trusting someone is a great influence to the community. If we are willing to trust each other, then we will have a better understanding of other cultures and be able to adapt it. I believe in order to make a strong bond with each other, we should be willing to trust each other and be willing to understand each other and that would make our community a better place to live.
Better the Community
This weeks reading really got me thinking about how this world can be so negative all the time. How there is always a scapegoat, how people don’t have enough trust and how we really need to start changing the way we view things. We need to have a more positive outlook on life, with that; I feel that our communities and the world in general would be better off.
Who is considered to be apart of a community? Is it the people who live there, the people who work there or go to school there, is there a real answer to this? Well, I think it’s the people who positively contribute to the community. As I was reading the Block book, I was really taken aback by the philosophy on “gifts”. I know I mentioned this in last week’s blog, but it still stays with me this week. I think that a lot of what a community is built upon, is what the people of that community contribute to it. This weeks reading, stated something that I never really realized until I saw the words put right in front of me. Community deals with fear. A main reason being today’s media. One could never turn on the TV and see something positive happening in their community. It is always about a problem and if there are no problems in that particular community it shows the problems of outside communities, or worldwide issues. I would like to turn on the TV and see the positive outcomes that communities are reaching, not who got murdered the other night and that the killer has still not been prosecuted. Why show all the problems, why not show the solutions to those problems.
Now with problems, I think communities have a whole other issue there. I think it’s true when Block says that when a community is confronted with a problem, the first thing that happens is they look for someone to blame. They think well here’s a problem someone must have caused it. Why put the blame on someone, why not work together in finding a solution for that problem. No one ever got ahead by blaming someone, your only delaying the process of finding a solution.
In the article I read this week, it discussed how to get people involved and participating in the community. The main topic they discussed was CONVERSATION. I think this is SO important in building a strong community. Talk to each other, listen to each other, brainstorm together and bring a positive outcome to the table. Build relationships within your community.
Back to who belongs to a community, well I guess there can be different opinions on it, but I stand strong on mine when I say that whoever contributes to a community is part of that community. I think that for a community to be strong, the people in that community have to have an open mind about outsiders joining their community. They need to learn to trust. If you don’t give the person a chance, how will you ever know what could have happened. Maybe the next person who works in your community could be the next person to turn it back around and give the community exactly what it needs.
Basically all I’m saying is that a community should be open to changes, to ideas and should always have a positive spin on things. No one gets anywhere by living in fear and by picking a scapegoat. Get together, get involved and better your community, because if you better things for your community, your bettering things for yourself, and lets face it, most people do things to benefit themselves. So if you won’t work hard for your communities at least do it for yourself.
Who is considered to be apart of a community? Is it the people who live there, the people who work there or go to school there, is there a real answer to this? Well, I think it’s the people who positively contribute to the community. As I was reading the Block book, I was really taken aback by the philosophy on “gifts”. I know I mentioned this in last week’s blog, but it still stays with me this week. I think that a lot of what a community is built upon, is what the people of that community contribute to it. This weeks reading, stated something that I never really realized until I saw the words put right in front of me. Community deals with fear. A main reason being today’s media. One could never turn on the TV and see something positive happening in their community. It is always about a problem and if there are no problems in that particular community it shows the problems of outside communities, or worldwide issues. I would like to turn on the TV and see the positive outcomes that communities are reaching, not who got murdered the other night and that the killer has still not been prosecuted. Why show all the problems, why not show the solutions to those problems.
Now with problems, I think communities have a whole other issue there. I think it’s true when Block says that when a community is confronted with a problem, the first thing that happens is they look for someone to blame. They think well here’s a problem someone must have caused it. Why put the blame on someone, why not work together in finding a solution for that problem. No one ever got ahead by blaming someone, your only delaying the process of finding a solution.
In the article I read this week, it discussed how to get people involved and participating in the community. The main topic they discussed was CONVERSATION. I think this is SO important in building a strong community. Talk to each other, listen to each other, brainstorm together and bring a positive outcome to the table. Build relationships within your community.
Back to who belongs to a community, well I guess there can be different opinions on it, but I stand strong on mine when I say that whoever contributes to a community is part of that community. I think that for a community to be strong, the people in that community have to have an open mind about outsiders joining their community. They need to learn to trust. If you don’t give the person a chance, how will you ever know what could have happened. Maybe the next person who works in your community could be the next person to turn it back around and give the community exactly what it needs.
Basically all I’m saying is that a community should be open to changes, to ideas and should always have a positive spin on things. No one gets anywhere by living in fear and by picking a scapegoat. Get together, get involved and better your community, because if you better things for your community, your bettering things for yourself, and lets face it, most people do things to benefit themselves. So if you won’t work hard for your communities at least do it for yourself.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Tarnishing a concept
As we sat in class on Tuesday, a lot more questions were going through my mind than answers. Unfortunately most of the time, if I thought too long about the questions, I would lose track of the conversation. One of the first things that came to mind was when Dr. Schmidt spoke briefly about how the cup he had in front of him was a coffee cup. We all acknowledged that it was a coffee cup, but what if it had actually been tea? or mocha? or teddy grahams for that matter? It may have been a silly thought, but it got me thinking, what happens when a concept we establish in our minds and becomes accepted by a group becomes tarnished by an individual or individuals with an agenda to change reality? How do we muster enough strength to literally alter the views of communities to our own?
Simiarly this summer, I had an interesting battle with the pastor of my church who oversees my musical directorship. As a boss, I cannot confide in him with musical details of my position, only because (to be quite frank) he doesn't know much about the position in general, nor does he really put the time in to see the job unfold. To his credit, he runs a 1500 family membership parish by himself so between hospital runs he might stop in to say hello. This became an issue over the summer when we spoke about the establishment of the children's choir. While I intend to embrace theology and put basic choral technique into the program, he had claimed that parishoners don't care about this. They only care about the finished product. As a quote, I was told that if I wanted a choir to sound like they do here in Princeton, I'm in the wrong place. Parents don't want their kids to learn about church in church choir. They only want their kids to sing for an hour and go home.
Performance in our society is one concept for me that has become tarnished. In the business world, one can't help but think, "When am I going to get the next raise? When will I get the next promotion?" Music is not a question formed by asking "when". Music is a question answered when we know how. Music educators have quite a task ahead of them. On page 12 of Peter Block's book, "Community", he sums up McKnight's thoughts and ideas by focusing on gifts and associational life. I belive this statement should ring true throughout our public and private school systems. But when gifts are put into place as an answer to the product and not a part of the process of forming that solution, the association factor that McKnight talks about is lost. Caring is a huge issue in the classroom. In Higgin's article, "The creative music workshop: event, facilitation, gift", he introduces the article by stating flat out that he is a "community musician...a musician committed to people, participation, context, diversity and equality of opportunity thorugh which active music-making experiences happen." While this perspective of concept is not one we carry in our teacher bags in America, we should never cease to figure out the best way to deliver a concept without losing our individual philosophies, goals and gifts.
Simiarly this summer, I had an interesting battle with the pastor of my church who oversees my musical directorship. As a boss, I cannot confide in him with musical details of my position, only because (to be quite frank) he doesn't know much about the position in general, nor does he really put the time in to see the job unfold. To his credit, he runs a 1500 family membership parish by himself so between hospital runs he might stop in to say hello. This became an issue over the summer when we spoke about the establishment of the children's choir. While I intend to embrace theology and put basic choral technique into the program, he had claimed that parishoners don't care about this. They only care about the finished product. As a quote, I was told that if I wanted a choir to sound like they do here in Princeton, I'm in the wrong place. Parents don't want their kids to learn about church in church choir. They only want their kids to sing for an hour and go home.
Performance in our society is one concept for me that has become tarnished. In the business world, one can't help but think, "When am I going to get the next raise? When will I get the next promotion?" Music is not a question formed by asking "when". Music is a question answered when we know how. Music educators have quite a task ahead of them. On page 12 of Peter Block's book, "Community", he sums up McKnight's thoughts and ideas by focusing on gifts and associational life. I belive this statement should ring true throughout our public and private school systems. But when gifts are put into place as an answer to the product and not a part of the process of forming that solution, the association factor that McKnight talks about is lost. Caring is a huge issue in the classroom. In Higgin's article, "The creative music workshop: event, facilitation, gift", he introduces the article by stating flat out that he is a "community musician...a musician committed to people, participation, context, diversity and equality of opportunity thorugh which active music-making experiences happen." While this perspective of concept is not one we carry in our teacher bags in America, we should never cease to figure out the best way to deliver a concept without losing our individual philosophies, goals and gifts.
Contributing Ones Gifts
In thinking back to class on Tuesday, I thought of contribution as a concept. In doing so, I found, as I expected, that there are many sub-concepts. Many of the other one-worded concepts we came up with fit the role of these sub-concepts. In contributing ones gifts to the community, an individual person feels a sense of responsibility and belonging.
If each individual realizes that, although they are one person, they have a part of the greater body just as a single piece of thread has a part in a tapestry or a drop of paint in the greatest works of Van Gogh. Each individual has his own potential that only he himself can achieve and therefore only he can contribute that which he has to the community of which he lives. Yes, there are people that have similar talents and abilities to contribute, but personalities combined with talents make each person a necessity. There is a great analogy to be made between choirs and this concept of contributing ones gifts. In a choir, we all have a voice part that many others share in singing the same notes and phrases as us, but we have our individual voice, our individual tone, and our individual musicianship skills. If a person chooses not to participate in the music making, the choir is not necessarily in a disastrous state, but the full potential of the choir cannot be achieved without what that person’s contribution.
Once each individual understands this concept that they are truly important, a person can then understand if he chooses not to contribute his time and talents, then the community is at a loss and cannot reach its full potential. This brings to a person a sense of responsibility to not deprive the community of which he is a part. After there is responsibility put into place, a person undoubtedly will feel a sense of belonging.
I am most fascinated with the fact that the concept of contributing ones gifts also allows for a person and the community to focus on the positives of that person. If a person feels that it is the “good part” of then that allow them to feel a sense of belonging, that person will have a desire to do even more good. It is important to know that everyone has a weakness, no matter who they are. If a society continues to focus on the “fixing” of that which is broken, it has the focus of the whole community on the negatives. There will almost always be a negative aspect to every situation. A storm can make the homeless shout because he is sick and wet just as it can make a man shout that his satellite dish is not working. I truly think that our society will not ever think we have reached a state of peace and happiness until we change our perspective; that realize that all individuals and communities have negatives and positives. It is the positive perspective of which we look at it that can have an impact on the feeling of a community.
If each individual realizes that, although they are one person, they have a part of the greater body just as a single piece of thread has a part in a tapestry or a drop of paint in the greatest works of Van Gogh. Each individual has his own potential that only he himself can achieve and therefore only he can contribute that which he has to the community of which he lives. Yes, there are people that have similar talents and abilities to contribute, but personalities combined with talents make each person a necessity. There is a great analogy to be made between choirs and this concept of contributing ones gifts. In a choir, we all have a voice part that many others share in singing the same notes and phrases as us, but we have our individual voice, our individual tone, and our individual musicianship skills. If a person chooses not to participate in the music making, the choir is not necessarily in a disastrous state, but the full potential of the choir cannot be achieved without what that person’s contribution.
Once each individual understands this concept that they are truly important, a person can then understand if he chooses not to contribute his time and talents, then the community is at a loss and cannot reach its full potential. This brings to a person a sense of responsibility to not deprive the community of which he is a part. After there is responsibility put into place, a person undoubtedly will feel a sense of belonging.
I am most fascinated with the fact that the concept of contributing ones gifts also allows for a person and the community to focus on the positives of that person. If a person feels that it is the “good part” of then that allow them to feel a sense of belonging, that person will have a desire to do even more good. It is important to know that everyone has a weakness, no matter who they are. If a society continues to focus on the “fixing” of that which is broken, it has the focus of the whole community on the negatives. There will almost always be a negative aspect to every situation. A storm can make the homeless shout because he is sick and wet just as it can make a man shout that his satellite dish is not working. I truly think that our society will not ever think we have reached a state of peace and happiness until we change our perspective; that realize that all individuals and communities have negatives and positives. It is the positive perspective of which we look at it that can have an impact on the feeling of a community.
Relationship and Contribution
I believe that everyone in a community has a responsibility to form relationships with others and contribute to the general welfare of the society. In order to achieve a functioning and thriving community, its citizens need to reach beyond their personal interests and goals and take time to consider what they can do for the community. It is only through this effort of contribution, that one can receive the benefits of what the community can do for the you as the citizen. In other words, if you are only taking and not giving to the community, people maybe be less likely to go out of their way to invest any interest in you, provide any assistance, or be generous to you.
I think that forming relationships and contributing to the society go hand in hand. If you are willing to do things for the community, people are more willing to create friendships and bonds with one another. Forming these relationships is what makes it easier to accomplish the goals of a society. There is a sense of trust between people, and thus people are willing to support one another. However, it is also possible to just provide your services to the community but not care about the people around you. In this case, i think it will be more difficult to create a positivie community, because people will still be wary of whether your contributions are for the general welfare of the community or whether you are still acting for self-interests. If you form relationships with people, perhaps you will be more apt to care about other people's needs.
I have noticed this connection between relationships and contributions in my own life. I am living in a house with three other classmates who for the most part were more acquaintances than close friends. As I began to adjust to this living situation, I noticed I could either be a social hermit or I could spend with my housemates in order to form closer relationships. When I started spending more time with them, I was interested in helping my housemates out and providing my services to the maintenance of the house. In return, I believe my housemates were not only appreciative but were generous to help me adjust to living off-campus.
I think it is important to contribute to a society, because you only get what you give. You can choose to live within yourself or be a part of the whole society. in the end, I believe there are more benefits to forming relationships and contributing to a community.
I think that forming relationships and contributing to the society go hand in hand. If you are willing to do things for the community, people are more willing to create friendships and bonds with one another. Forming these relationships is what makes it easier to accomplish the goals of a society. There is a sense of trust between people, and thus people are willing to support one another. However, it is also possible to just provide your services to the community but not care about the people around you. In this case, i think it will be more difficult to create a positivie community, because people will still be wary of whether your contributions are for the general welfare of the community or whether you are still acting for self-interests. If you form relationships with people, perhaps you will be more apt to care about other people's needs.
I have noticed this connection between relationships and contributions in my own life. I am living in a house with three other classmates who for the most part were more acquaintances than close friends. As I began to adjust to this living situation, I noticed I could either be a social hermit or I could spend with my housemates in order to form closer relationships. When I started spending more time with them, I was interested in helping my housemates out and providing my services to the maintenance of the house. In return, I believe my housemates were not only appreciative but were generous to help me adjust to living off-campus.
I think it is important to contribute to a society, because you only get what you give. You can choose to live within yourself or be a part of the whole society. in the end, I believe there are more benefits to forming relationships and contributing to a community.
Relationships+ Safety
Last class we were talking about concepts; attempting to define what a concept is and talking about what a concept could be. We narrowed in on the concept of community and its many contributing aspects that are important to the make up of what is community.
During class I was too busy trying to organize my thoughts and conceptualize the information being discussed to participate out loud, so I sat back and listened to our small community contribute to the concept of community. I was glad to hear the different ideas and concepts that were being discussed. It was only when we disbursed into smaller groups that I was able to assemble my thoughts into words.One concept aspect that really caught my ear was relationships and their importance to community.
The concept of community really hits home with me personally and even more so the relationships we have within that community. Being a type one, I am all about working in groups and contributing to a communal goal/goals. In order for the group or community to really work together to make a change, there needs to be strong relationships between the people working together. Therein lies the problem. A community can be goal oriented and hard working, but if there are no personal connections to others inside the community, then the perception of realities will not be easily changed and a transformation could not occur.
Community promotes a sense of belonging and purpose and unless we have relationships in the community that give us a purpose to contribute and give us a feeling of belonging, the validity of the community is compromised.
In a society today that is made up of independent people, schools, and businesses , the idea of interdependency is almost new. The society we live in today is an example of the complete opposite of what it needs to become. Technology is largely to blame. Don't get me wrong, the technology we have today is amazing but it is also a great tool for disengagement from the relationships one has or could have.I give to you the email, almost making the phone call obsolete. Speaking of phones, texts messages are a great example of how not to build strong relationships these days. All of these fun gadgets we have today distance us from the great community that we can and need to be.
This brings about some other thoughts of why does the reality we live in today need to change? Does society want to change? The need for change is a simple answer, safety. I believe that a majority of people live in fear. Fear of what? Why? People are fearful because they are living in a society that has pushed for independence in most aspects of life. This independence disconnects their relations with other people and instills fear in them. They no longer have a sense of belonging, no sense of purpose. Burning the bridges they once crossed instead of repairing and building new bridges. Only when the relationships of people in a community flourish, can the concepts and ideas of purpose, belonging, and safety thrive. This is all good and well when set to paper, but the practical use is quite complex.
There is no wrong way to go about creating relationships or working as a community. The problems that arise are acting first. Action is the first step to creating relationships and getting things done.
During class I was too busy trying to organize my thoughts and conceptualize the information being discussed to participate out loud, so I sat back and listened to our small community contribute to the concept of community. I was glad to hear the different ideas and concepts that were being discussed. It was only when we disbursed into smaller groups that I was able to assemble my thoughts into words.One concept aspect that really caught my ear was relationships and their importance to community.
The concept of community really hits home with me personally and even more so the relationships we have within that community. Being a type one, I am all about working in groups and contributing to a communal goal/goals. In order for the group or community to really work together to make a change, there needs to be strong relationships between the people working together. Therein lies the problem. A community can be goal oriented and hard working, but if there are no personal connections to others inside the community, then the perception of realities will not be easily changed and a transformation could not occur.
Community promotes a sense of belonging and purpose and unless we have relationships in the community that give us a purpose to contribute and give us a feeling of belonging, the validity of the community is compromised.
In a society today that is made up of independent people, schools, and businesses , the idea of interdependency is almost new. The society we live in today is an example of the complete opposite of what it needs to become. Technology is largely to blame. Don't get me wrong, the technology we have today is amazing but it is also a great tool for disengagement from the relationships one has or could have.I give to you the email, almost making the phone call obsolete. Speaking of phones, texts messages are a great example of how not to build strong relationships these days. All of these fun gadgets we have today distance us from the great community that we can and need to be.
This brings about some other thoughts of why does the reality we live in today need to change? Does society want to change? The need for change is a simple answer, safety. I believe that a majority of people live in fear. Fear of what? Why? People are fearful because they are living in a society that has pushed for independence in most aspects of life. This independence disconnects their relations with other people and instills fear in them. They no longer have a sense of belonging, no sense of purpose. Burning the bridges they once crossed instead of repairing and building new bridges. Only when the relationships of people in a community flourish, can the concepts and ideas of purpose, belonging, and safety thrive. This is all good and well when set to paper, but the practical use is quite complex.
There is no wrong way to go about creating relationships or working as a community. The problems that arise are acting first. Action is the first step to creating relationships and getting things done.
"Relationship"
The word that I want to focus on this week is “relationship.” After completing the reading and contemplating the discussions that have taken place in class, I have many thoughts regarding the concept of community. While I do feel that there are a number of different factors that contribute to its success, I also believe that the relationships that make up that community are what drive it forward. In Peter Block’s book Community: The Structure of Belonging, he touches upon Robert Putnam’s idea of social capital. This concept is one that I really connected with because while is seems so simple and obvious it is also an idea that holds a lot of weight.
Putnam defines social capital as “the cohesion that exists among its [the community’s] citizens” (pg 17). Through his extensive research, Putnam found that the success or decline of a community had largely to do with the social capital that existed. While one might assume that community is generally grounded in geography, culture, or economic state, Putnam’s findings surprisingly showed social capital as the distinguishing factor. For me, social capital is such a profound idea because it emphasizes the need for an understanding between individuals. The relationships that exist within a community are essential because they are what enable a lot of other elements to be successful. Trust, for instance, is only achieved through the development of relationships. I would not be able to put my trust into the hands of someone whom I did not have some kind of relationship with beforehand. If community is built upon a feeling of belongingness, one will never fully feel as though he/she belongs if a connection with others is not present. In Peter Block’s book, he also mentions the idea of bringing ones gifts to a community rather than focusing on his/her deficiencies. This insightful concept, once again, relates to social capital. I, personally, do not feel that I would be comfortable in presenting the gifts I have to offer if I did not share a relationship with those I am choosing to share them with. While I do believe that trust, belongingness, gifts and other components of a community are crucial to its success, the relationships that are formed are a starting point for all others to be put into motion.
In Dr. Lee Higgin’s article, “Acts of Hospitality: the community in Community Music,” he touches upon the power of relationships. The article describes individuals who became part of a community samba group and, in doing so, were able to form a small community of their own. Many felt that the samba group was their “extended family” and that they grew up within this community. While some might view the group as just another extracurricular activity, those who played an active role were the individuals who developed relationships with others. Those relationships are what made each person feel responsible for the group’s continuation and well-being. This article presents great examples of social capital and its prevalence within a community. It made me realize that at the end of the day, you’re not going to work hard for something that you don’t believe in or are not invested in. That care and investment is found in our care for others. Social capital helps to transform people’s outlooks and drives them to want to create advancements that will benefit the community as a whole.
In today’s day and age, technology has really hindered the formation of interpersonal connections with others. Our iPods and Blackberrys easily allow us to disconnect ourselves from the world. While our ability to remain in our own personal world might be desirable, it is also what inhibits our ability to form relationships with others. It is only through interconnection, not disconnect, that a community can really bring about the change they hope to see.
Concepts and Individuality
When beginning the discussion of concepts, I was confident that I had a good understanding of what a concept is and how it is formed. Now that I have heard several ideas of the word 'concept', I agree with the main definition that a concept is a set of thoughts and ideas that provokes action or more ideas. Without concepts, there would be no action or working towards a goal or accomplishment. People would just do things to do them. They would have nothing to work towards.
When moving into the discussion of what makes a concept valid, I think back to the controversial question of the chicken and the egg. Just because it has not been proven, does not mean that this is not a valid concept. The idea of a concept is still there, with or without validity on the subject at hand. The concept is just severely lacking evidence but may still have support on both sides. The ideas are still making people work towards figuring something out
I think I concept just has to be an idea leading to other ideas that is strongly supported by someone. I see a concept as a building block to more ideas and bigger concepts. No matter how small, a thought leading to get something done can be considered a concept. For example, when I decided that I would get ahead in my classes for this semester as much as possible, that was a concept for me. It was a new set of ideas that would help me work towards my goals of having a more balanced life. Just because I did not come up with a major phenomenon that scientists will study for years, I still came up with beneficial ideas that cause action to happen.
*
The word I chose in class, individuality, is a concept that can be used in many different ways. Individuality defines who a person is. It is essential to know who you are because no one else is ever given that opportunity. Each person is incredibly different from the next. Just in the CP III class alone, I am surrounded by interesting people who have made different life choices for themselves. Each experience can be a lesson. For example, once I went to Europe and learned the history of the country, I was able to come back home and relate to things more. I found my lectures in high school history classes more appealing, had something to discuss with foreign exchange students, and was able to better appreciate other cultures.
In community, individuality is necessary for growing. When everyone is aware of their strengths, it is easy to see who makes a good leader and who is better off with a backseat role. Relationships will build when the understanding between people is formed. By being self-aware, it is easier to find where people fit within a community and who works well with whom. If one person is constantly living through other people's wishes and desires, they never truly find success within themselves and in turn are not as able to help a community.
John McKnight's idea of focusing on gifts can fit in with the concept of individuality. It is important to explore yourself as a person to find what your strengths and weaknesses are. Once found, emphasis should be placed on the things are you good at doing and they should be shared with others. A community based on the focus of gifts can be very strong, however, it is crucial for everyone to have the same thoughts. This focus is to help the group, not to harm it.
When moving into the discussion of what makes a concept valid, I think back to the controversial question of the chicken and the egg. Just because it has not been proven, does not mean that this is not a valid concept. The idea of a concept is still there, with or without validity on the subject at hand. The concept is just severely lacking evidence but may still have support on both sides. The ideas are still making people work towards figuring something out
I think I concept just has to be an idea leading to other ideas that is strongly supported by someone. I see a concept as a building block to more ideas and bigger concepts. No matter how small, a thought leading to get something done can be considered a concept. For example, when I decided that I would get ahead in my classes for this semester as much as possible, that was a concept for me. It was a new set of ideas that would help me work towards my goals of having a more balanced life. Just because I did not come up with a major phenomenon that scientists will study for years, I still came up with beneficial ideas that cause action to happen.
*
The word I chose in class, individuality, is a concept that can be used in many different ways. Individuality defines who a person is. It is essential to know who you are because no one else is ever given that opportunity. Each person is incredibly different from the next. Just in the CP III class alone, I am surrounded by interesting people who have made different life choices for themselves. Each experience can be a lesson. For example, once I went to Europe and learned the history of the country, I was able to come back home and relate to things more. I found my lectures in high school history classes more appealing, had something to discuss with foreign exchange students, and was able to better appreciate other cultures.
In community, individuality is necessary for growing. When everyone is aware of their strengths, it is easy to see who makes a good leader and who is better off with a backseat role. Relationships will build when the understanding between people is formed. By being self-aware, it is easier to find where people fit within a community and who works well with whom. If one person is constantly living through other people's wishes and desires, they never truly find success within themselves and in turn are not as able to help a community.
John McKnight's idea of focusing on gifts can fit in with the concept of individuality. It is important to explore yourself as a person to find what your strengths and weaknesses are. Once found, emphasis should be placed on the things are you good at doing and they should be shared with others. A community based on the focus of gifts can be very strong, however, it is crucial for everyone to have the same thoughts. This focus is to help the group, not to harm it.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Authenticity
In our last class we discussed, both in small groups and as a class, what factors we believed were the essential concepts to establishing a flourishing community. Not being able to gather my thoughts in the moment, I took a back seat in the classroom and listened to what other groups, and even my own group-mate, had to say. I was waiting for a light to go on in the attic, but it never did. Although people raised fabulous points, it was evident that I needed to stew on this "concept of a concept" more.
In my opinion, the essential ingredient to a successful community is authenticity. In reading the Block, I found that the idea of authenticity in a community really resonated with me. There is an old saying that "what's good for the goose is good for the gander," and I appreciate Block's direct challenge of that notion. This is to say that not every community can benefit from emulating another communities efforts. Block rejects the idea of "importing" social fabric and successful communities, and challenges communities to create an identity for themselves. The challenge lies in resisting conformity and "going with the grain," and urges communities to identify and maintain an authentic individual identity as a whole.
So, how does a community do this? Or, to put a CP spin on it, in what ways/to what extent does social capital and individuality reinforce the idea of authenticity in a community?
Social capital, as manifested by Putnam, is the quality and/or strength of various relationships within a community. To establish one's community as "successful" or "distinguished" one must come to realize that dialogue, as proposed by Erhard, is at the heart of social capital. That constant flow of communication will assist in progressing a community invaluably. As dialogue becomes a prominent part of one's community, it is also important to converse about an individual's or a group's gifts, as opposed to their deficiencies (as highlighted by McKnight). My high school voice teacher once told me, in reference to my frustration with the slow progress of a growing voice, "Imagine you're driving. As you're driving, you look to the gutter at the side of the road instead of focusing on your destination which lies ahead. If you look in that gutter long enough, you'll never reach your intended destination, you'll just end up crashing in the gutter." This is to sat that no good can ever come from focusing on one's handicaps. Communities have to think about the gifts they possess, including those of groups and individuals, and conceptualize how they can authenticate a communal identity.
Another key point to the success of a community, is not so much the focus on, but the acknowledgment of the individual. What does each person bring to the table? When each person is thought to be indispensable and has a hand in creating something, by lending their individual gifts to the community, it is suggest by Block that each person will then be committed to the project. In this way the individual reinforces the idea of the whole. Thus, the whole achieves the ultimate goal of authentic individual identity seeing as each community, as a whole, is chock-full of members who are active and individual to their community.
Contribution + Communication
The first word that came to my head was sharing. Although it made sense I still didn’t like it. I felt there was another word that could say what I meant more accurately. The word was contribution, which thankfully another group in the class had said. Without contribution there is only our thoughts. What good is any thought to anyone if it isn’t shared? As I re-read the material it’s painfully obvious that what I’m reading is this author’s contribution. And in the first chapter what the author talks about are his mentor’s contributions to him. So there an idea is conceptualized and then brought out as a new idea and then written in a book so that others may find it, read it, and learn it.
In Block’s book he talks about McKnight’s ideas of gifts. The very nature of a gift is something you have to give to others and receive as well. In the context of community, gifts come as forms of “assets, resources, and talents.” (Pg. 13) These three things are what people can bring to a community to promote transformation. Of course this brings into play another word: communication. I judge dramatic changes in Earth’s history based on how fast and the quantity of information travels. Starting with ancient runners, where a message was given to a person to literally carry the message as fast as he could from the source to recipient. Using birds to travel distances further and faster. The printing press mass-produced ideas to make them more available and could be carried by horses or trains. Phones and the Internet boosted the speed that information travels and made the amount that could travel be almost infinite. I feel that the more information there is, and the more people share it, the better chance there is for some innovation to come along to completely change the way we live.
Contributions to a community are shared through communication, bringing about transformations to the way people in that community live. What music has to contribute to a community is more of a personal transformation, different for every individual. In Higgins’ article, 'Acts of hospitality: the community in Community Music,' the transformations his music groups caused were very empowering to the members involved. I believe music enriches life and to participate in it even more so.
In Higgins’ secondary praxis class, we participate in improvisation using instruments. Each of us contributes to the music the group is making and we communicate without saying anything. It’s a very rewarding experience and is a great thing to share with people. A lot can be taken out of what I’m learning in that class to translate into community with a focus on music.
In a learning setting, anytime anyone communicates any idea they are contributing to the learning experience. This promotes learning for the entire class and pushes action forward for others to take the ideas, grasp them, and then come up with new ideas to contribute. As a teacher, it is important not to be the only contributor, but to share that role with all students. Not only does this give students a chance to form their own ideas and share them, but can also give the instructor a sense of where in the learning process the students are at and encourage accordingly in the right directions.
In Block’s book he talks about McKnight’s ideas of gifts. The very nature of a gift is something you have to give to others and receive as well. In the context of community, gifts come as forms of “assets, resources, and talents.” (Pg. 13) These three things are what people can bring to a community to promote transformation. Of course this brings into play another word: communication. I judge dramatic changes in Earth’s history based on how fast and the quantity of information travels. Starting with ancient runners, where a message was given to a person to literally carry the message as fast as he could from the source to recipient. Using birds to travel distances further and faster. The printing press mass-produced ideas to make them more available and could be carried by horses or trains. Phones and the Internet boosted the speed that information travels and made the amount that could travel be almost infinite. I feel that the more information there is, and the more people share it, the better chance there is for some innovation to come along to completely change the way we live.
Contributions to a community are shared through communication, bringing about transformations to the way people in that community live. What music has to contribute to a community is more of a personal transformation, different for every individual. In Higgins’ article, 'Acts of hospitality: the community in Community Music,' the transformations his music groups caused were very empowering to the members involved. I believe music enriches life and to participate in it even more so.
In Higgins’ secondary praxis class, we participate in improvisation using instruments. Each of us contributes to the music the group is making and we communicate without saying anything. It’s a very rewarding experience and is a great thing to share with people. A lot can be taken out of what I’m learning in that class to translate into community with a focus on music.
In a learning setting, anytime anyone communicates any idea they are contributing to the learning experience. This promotes learning for the entire class and pushes action forward for others to take the ideas, grasp them, and then come up with new ideas to contribute. As a teacher, it is important not to be the only contributor, but to share that role with all students. Not only does this give students a chance to form their own ideas and share them, but can also give the instructor a sense of where in the learning process the students are at and encourage accordingly in the right directions.
Contribute
After working on community and education this week, the one word that keeps coming to mind is contribute. I feel that in order to get a strong community built inside education there needs to be contributions from everyone in and out of the school. While reading Block’s book, I really connected with the specific word gifts. I think that the word gifts fits into my concept of contributing. Other words that connect with my idea of what contributing is would be language, and connections. All three words gifts, language and connection branch off of contributing, which to me is very important for a community in education.
To contribute simply means to give something in order to achieve or provide something. I think that the best thing a community can do in order to build their educational system is to contribute their “gifts”. I formed my ideas about this through the philosophy of John McKnight. I think that it is SO important for people to share their talents or if you will “gifts” to better their community and education. Positive input and ideas are what take us to better places and strengthen our community and education. Why focus on someone’s’ deficiencies rather than ones gifts? Having negative attitudes with not help any situation, it’s the gifts and talents that create great outcomes. Bringing your gifts to the floor is in sense contributing.
Another thing that I think is important to bring to the table is language. This meaning speaking, listening and conversation. I have based this idea off of another philosophy that I read in Block’s book. This philosophy belongs to Erhard. In order to contribute two VERY important aspects are people listening and speaking to one another, which creates a conversation. The community needs to build relationships with others who are all working towards one goal. In this case that means bettering the community and education. Listening to people’s different ideas, accepting them and considering them is one step in the right direction. Communication is a main key to get things rolling and working together with others. With this, people can work together and work off of one another’s ideas and brainstorm. It is true; two heads are better than one.
Lastly, I think that in order to build a strong community, one needs to make connections. The teachers need to make connections with their students, with parents; the faculty needs to become known to the parents, and also the businesses around the school. As I read my article “Building a Strong Community Partnership” by Carl Vogel, he kept stating how making connections with the business around you are VERY important. I found this very interesting and didn’t really know what he meant or why connections would be important with them until I read in depth what he thought. I now realize that business could be helpful to schools, for example help with fundraisers and with that in mind, if you go to the business with a direct goal for the fundraiser they are more willing to except and help out. The more people on a committee for the school, the more ideas, the better the future for that school.
Overall. I think that contributing is a main key in expanding and bettering the community and education. The more people that can get involved the better.
To contribute simply means to give something in order to achieve or provide something. I think that the best thing a community can do in order to build their educational system is to contribute their “gifts”. I formed my ideas about this through the philosophy of John McKnight. I think that it is SO important for people to share their talents or if you will “gifts” to better their community and education. Positive input and ideas are what take us to better places and strengthen our community and education. Why focus on someone’s’ deficiencies rather than ones gifts? Having negative attitudes with not help any situation, it’s the gifts and talents that create great outcomes. Bringing your gifts to the floor is in sense contributing.
Another thing that I think is important to bring to the table is language. This meaning speaking, listening and conversation. I have based this idea off of another philosophy that I read in Block’s book. This philosophy belongs to Erhard. In order to contribute two VERY important aspects are people listening and speaking to one another, which creates a conversation. The community needs to build relationships with others who are all working towards one goal. In this case that means bettering the community and education. Listening to people’s different ideas, accepting them and considering them is one step in the right direction. Communication is a main key to get things rolling and working together with others. With this, people can work together and work off of one another’s ideas and brainstorm. It is true; two heads are better than one.
Lastly, I think that in order to build a strong community, one needs to make connections. The teachers need to make connections with their students, with parents; the faculty needs to become known to the parents, and also the businesses around the school. As I read my article “Building a Strong Community Partnership” by Carl Vogel, he kept stating how making connections with the business around you are VERY important. I found this very interesting and didn’t really know what he meant or why connections would be important with them until I read in depth what he thought. I now realize that business could be helpful to schools, for example help with fundraisers and with that in mind, if you go to the business with a direct goal for the fundraiser they are more willing to except and help out. The more people on a committee for the school, the more ideas, the better the future for that school.
Overall. I think that contributing is a main key in expanding and bettering the community and education. The more people that can get involved the better.
Monday, September 8, 2008
So what's a concept?
All of these ideas about community have really got me to thinking: Maybe I should go talk to my neighbors. I find the words of some of the people Peter Block has based his practice to are very profound. Werner Erhard's ideas that "... it is the future that one lives into that shapes one's being and action in the present" (pg. 16) really struck me as a concept that has a lot of meaning to me. Erhard goes on to explain that most people perceive the past as having an effect on their own present but how their view of the past effects their view of the future and has little to no effect on their present. In the journal article I read, “Acts of hospitality: the community in Community Music,” this idea of shaping the future seemed to tie not so much into what a community is, but what the possibilities a community can achieve. Higgins’ interviews with members of his Samba ensemble show how the way a person shapes their future can have a dramatic effect on their present.
At first it was difficult to grasp what Erhard had said, his idea did not make immediate sense to me; I had to change my perception of the past, present, and future in order for the idea to change into a concept. The difference of an idea and a concept, even though the meaning of each word is almost identical, is that a concept can change the foundations of a previous existing notion. An idea, I think, is added on to notions one already has. In this sense, all concepts start out as ideas. The original thinker’s ideas are then passed on to others who “conceptualize” it. The original idea now rooted deep in their foundations of perception, they can use it to form new ideas, share these ideas and they become concepts themselves.
Earlier I mentioned possibilities a community could achieve. The meaning of this does not mean that their possibilities come to fruition and are successful; this only means that they achieve the gaining of the possibility of that success. To me, this is a new idea of the word possibility. I always thought that possibility meant: now that the possibility for success is there, I should focus on seeing that to the end of that possibility, whether it was success or failure. Now instead of a word, it is a concept; a possibility is a link that connects to other possibilities of similar objectives that push action toward those goals forward. Achievements start as these possibilities and keep building until something is accomplished. Not the final product per sé but a step toward that direction.
For some reason, an example of a concept that is described as a concept popped into my head. In the movie “Drumline,” the director of the main character’s band says: “So what’s the concept?” To which the reply is “One band, one sound!” So one band, one sound is the concept. I think that statement is an idea which instantly sparks in the minds of all the members the actual concept: despite that the members of this one band each carry an individual instrument, they must all sound together as if to be one instrument. This is a good example of how one person’s idea when shared with people becomes a concept when it builds into their foundations of what the idea of what one band, one sound means.
At first it was difficult to grasp what Erhard had said, his idea did not make immediate sense to me; I had to change my perception of the past, present, and future in order for the idea to change into a concept. The difference of an idea and a concept, even though the meaning of each word is almost identical, is that a concept can change the foundations of a previous existing notion. An idea, I think, is added on to notions one already has. In this sense, all concepts start out as ideas. The original thinker’s ideas are then passed on to others who “conceptualize” it. The original idea now rooted deep in their foundations of perception, they can use it to form new ideas, share these ideas and they become concepts themselves.
Earlier I mentioned possibilities a community could achieve. The meaning of this does not mean that their possibilities come to fruition and are successful; this only means that they achieve the gaining of the possibility of that success. To me, this is a new idea of the word possibility. I always thought that possibility meant: now that the possibility for success is there, I should focus on seeing that to the end of that possibility, whether it was success or failure. Now instead of a word, it is a concept; a possibility is a link that connects to other possibilities of similar objectives that push action toward those goals forward. Achievements start as these possibilities and keep building until something is accomplished. Not the final product per sé but a step toward that direction.
For some reason, an example of a concept that is described as a concept popped into my head. In the movie “Drumline,” the director of the main character’s band says: “So what’s the concept?” To which the reply is “One band, one sound!” So one band, one sound is the concept. I think that statement is an idea which instantly sparks in the minds of all the members the actual concept: despite that the members of this one band each carry an individual instrument, they must all sound together as if to be one instrument. This is a good example of how one person’s idea when shared with people becomes a concept when it builds into their foundations of what the idea of what one band, one sound means.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)