TACTics Journal

A Publication for and by TOC for Education Practitioners

February 2, 2001

 

CONTENTS

Networking

    (1)       A Response to POOGI Letter #12, Jorge G. Arias

    (2)     A Long Way from Red October!, Kathy Suerken

Quote

   (3)      G. K. Chesterton

Editors’ Notes

   (4)     Kay Buckner-Seal, Cheryl A. Edwards

Connections

    (5)     5th Annual TOCFE International Conference/First Annual TOCFE International Student’s Conference, Cheryl A. Edwards

   

NETWORKING

(1)       A Response to POOGI Letter #12

From Jorge G. Arias, Ecuador

 

After reading the POOGI Letter, I just started to think, "What would be the goal of the schools?"  I am not an educator.  I have a certain influence from the board of directors of my son's school, and I am convinced that in order to sell the TOC concepts, we must start defining the goal of the system.  Could you share your points of view about this matter?  I will appreciate so much because this concept could be the start of a revolution in the basis of the educational concepts in my environment.

Thank you for your help.

 

(2)        A Long Way from Red October!

By Kathy Suerken

 

"It isn't that we don't see a solution. 

It's that we don't see the problem."

–Author unknown

 

Guess what?  I've found Red October!  Let me TELL you the coordinates so that you can get on board, too.  They read: T-O-C!

 

That was I, upon my return from a Jonah course in 1993, enthusiastically telling my teaching colleagues (Y's) WHY they should be as excited as I was about a new solution to create a win/win world, starting in our classrooms!  After all, isn't that what teachers are supposed to do?  Help others?

 

And with the best of all possible intentions, I took the silver bullet and aimed it at my foot (which was in my mouth!)  What mistake did I make?

 

I brought them another new idea.  I brought them an answer, not a question.  A solution, not the problem.  What do you think was their response?

 

Licking my wounds, I went underground and taught my middle school students, that year, instead of them.  But with those students, I started with a story about them told through a simple tree, which generated an idea from one of them in the form of a question! (which I asked for in writing)  "Mrs. Suerken, can we keep on doing that graph thing?" 

 

To me, this is the same as teaching the cloud to kids through content (stories, especially) instead of starting with the personal application.  I am reminded of Cheryl Edward's experience while still a reading consultant in Detroit Public Schools.  She taught the cloud through a literature example in a middle school classroom and, as she was about to leave the building, the teacher came running after her and asked, "Could you please come back to the room?  The students want to know if you would help them use the cloud on a personal problem!"

 

The process made so much sense to the students that they decided to put themselves into the frame of reference.  So how do we get all caregivers of students to do the same– to personally ask for TOC?

 

I have given serious thought to the first 3 times that I "accidentally" got adults to ask for TOC.  In each case, I was not attempting to get them personally to decide on TOC, but rather to get them to support TOC for someone else.  Therefore, I purposely didn't start with a "you need this" approach.  That is the answer that I want them to come up with on their own initiative.  So, I have learned NOT to start with the TOC solution.

 

But how do I start?  Here's the beginning of a recent presentation to some Y's.  (And yes, it would need to be adapted for a lunch room chat!)

 

Because people don't like to have their time wasted or to be associated with something too “risky,” I usually, first, show how successful TOCFE is around the world.  I do this visually with a page of all our flags and give the briefest of quantifiable details in so doing– 30,000 teachers trained in Malaysia within 3 months etc.  Is this preempting the conformity obstacle?  Maybe, not sufficiently.  But it does helps to get some initial interest, put them in a comfort zone, and evoke enough curiosity so that I can continue.

 

Then, I go right to layer one of resistance to change (we agree there is a problem).  In order to get this agreement without making them feel blamed for the problem, I ask a question that allows them to “vent” their frustrations and, in so doing, to surface some underlying assumptions.  I ask, "What prevents us from achieving our educational goals?"

 

If they answer this question, they have agreed that we do have a problem (that what we have in education isn't working).  But their answer will likely be a litany of blame– the assumptions that the problem is caused by someone else.  So for me, getting agreement on layer two (what is the problem) must begin with redirecting the blame from people to the situation.  Sometimes it's as simple as asking, do you think these people are intentionally trying to do a bad job (teachers, bosses, parents, kids, …whomever)?

 

Usually the answer is, "No, I guess not.  Maybe they just don't know how."  (Remember my solution that I want them to ask for is: TOC tools.)

 

So, I can bring them to agree that we need tools, but not yet TOC tools.  They may still think their tools (programs, etc.) work if they could just get their stakeholders to use them.  AHA!  Have we found a common denominator?  The frustration of not being able to convince others to try OUR idea!  What a great Archimedes frustration point to leverage!

 

Therefore, my next question is to call for the obstacles preventing others from trying new ideas.  Usually I use Efrat's Cloud* as the vehicle because everyone has empathy for the need for security and asks for assumptions on the security side:  "In order to feel secure, I resist change (trying new ideas, etc.) because…?”  And, I write down their assumptions (ideas).  Every last one of them.  Everyone is even more engaged in the discussion by now.

*Efrat's Security/Satisfaction Cloud

A: Be happy

B: Feel satisfaction

D: Change
A: Be Happy

C: Feel security

D': Don't Change

 

In order to “Be Happy” (A), I must “Feel Satisfaction” (B). 

In order to “Feel Satisfaction” (B),”I must “Change” (D).

 

On the other hand:

In order to “Be Happy” (A), I must “Feel Security” (C).

In order to “Feel Security” (C), I must “Not Change” (D').

 

Their assumptions are predictable and allow me to go back with a follow up question, "Are you suggesting that if had a way (some tools) to make new ideas less risky, to make people comfortable with change etc., it would fix the (your/my our) problem?"

 

I have always gotten agreement on that injection.  And of course they are justifiably thinking, “Yes, but how?"

 

And now, I have to deliver the flying pig injection: tools that work (heh, heh!).  The first one I usually present is cause and effect methodology because it beautifully and visually demonstrates that we have a generic process to challenge the above assumptions.  I use a simple diagram of cause and effect boxes (or circles) that are BLANK inside and connected with arrows and I explain why this cause and effect methodology allows us to think through the consequences of ideas and behaviors so that we can predict results and plan for things that might go wrong.

 

Theoretically, it makes sense to them (I have convinced them with logic) but I have to make it very concretely practical (and relevant).  So then, I rhetorically ask, "Can children use this process?"

 

And now, I show them a frame of reference.  I use an example (a case story) of a student's work with documented results.  For me, it works best if the results are quantified (happened more than once).  So, I share a beautifully worded testimonial from a teacher, who states 100% success with children who write their negative branches.  I like those odds!"

 

Then, I show the use of cause and effect in content (an old example from my Jonah kids).  After that, I do the same for the cloud and the PrT.  I close with my PrT lesson with juvenile offenders and one or two of their very compelling testimonials.  Because showing examples takes time, I use only what is minimally sufficient to get the job done.

 

What's different about this strategy from my days on Red October?  Now my first step (strategy) to convince Y's is ALWAYS to make sure that we agree on the problem.  That means I had to stop doing what wasn't working!  For me, it's made a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE.

 

QUOTE

(3)           " It isn't that they can't see the solution.  It is that they can't see the problem." —G. K. Chesterton

 

EDITORS’ NOTES

(4)           Kay Buckner-Seal, Cheryl A. Edwards

What’s on your mind?  Share them with the network!  Send snail-mail to Cheryl A. Edwards, 2253 S. Hill Island Rd., Cedarville, MI 49719, USA.  Or, send hyperlink to <redwards@sault.com> or <bucknek@earthlink.net>.

 

 

CONNECTIONS

(5)        5th Annual TOCFE International Conference/First Annual TOCFE International Student’s Conference

From Cheryl A. Edwards

 

The best way to predict the future is to create it through TOC."

TOC for Education, Inc. presents the 5th Annual TOCFE International Conference and the First Annual TOCFE International Student’s Conference!

Date:                                June 25-28, 2001

 

Location:                                Detroit, Michigan USA

 

Hotel:                                Northfield Hilton

                        5500 Crooks Road

                        Troy, Michigan 48098

                        248. 879. 2100

The Northfield Hilton is adjacent to Interstate 75 at Crooks Road, Exit 72

 

Reservations:                                1. 800. HILTONS

                        Ask for TOC for Education’s special room rates.

                Single or Double Occupancy

Per night $139.00 U.S. + Tax (6% Michigan Sales Tax and 7% Occupancy Tax).  This rate includes breakfast for two.

 

Transportation:                                Detroit Metropolitan Airport (DTW)