(extracts from September 1996)
Issues in Research on SML |
Self Managed Learning at Arun |
| I
do not have any new research about SML applications to report. This is more
a ‘thought piece’ on the ‘usefulness’ of research in
SML. My thoughts go something like this. Doing SML, researching our practice in doing it, and reporting the outcomes to colleagues, seem to fit very well together. Whether as a set adviser andor as a self managing learner, doing this professionally requires that the person matches up to Donald Schon’s notion of the ‘ reflective practitioner’. We should be able to communicate the knowledge we have gained from our research and practice to others. Some of our practice will be ‘embedded’ in propositional knowledge (knowing about) and practical knowing (knowing how to). The greatest proportion of it, will be experiential knowing, ‘embodied’ in our own practice or modelled in the behaviour of more experienced colleagues, clients or sponsors. By their very nature, the principles and practise of SML seem to provide the ideal structure and context where learning and researching can be as one. If I had some research work to report on here, I think that I could communicate about all the kinds of knowledge above in a written form and in a way that those likely to read it would find useful. However, at present, that is not my concern. Of greater importance would be whether or not those unlikely to read it would also find it useful, and sufficiently useful to want to get involved and develop SML for themselves or for their organisations. I had assumed that one of the important outcomes of research in SML (as in anything) would be better individual or corporate decision making on the part of those who had not used it; about whether, when or how to use it. Recent experiences lead me to conclude that this is not the case. Perhaps I should not be so surprised, given that I also know that decisions of these and other kinds in organisations are affected by all sorts of things other than the clear evidence about precisely what something is and about it’s efficacy. On the other hand, it does raise the obvious point that what is useful to individuals and organisations who are into SML is not the same as what could be useful to those who are not - or useful in communicating with those who are not. It seems that my communication of research based propositional knowledge is OK but that of practical knowing, linked as it is to embodied knowledge is not. Since beginning to write this piece, I have come across a qualitative evaluation study of a management development programme, just published, which unintentionally provides some pointers, (Holman, Hall : ‘Competence in MD : Rites and Wrongs’ : British Journal of Management : June 96). I say unintentionally because the research was an evaluation study of a programme driven by the MCI competence framework and standards. Not surprisingly, the findings of the study led to concerns on the part of the researchers about competence driven development processes, e.g. that they are reductionist and contrive no more than a ‘tick box approach’! These are worth examining in some detail within an SML frame, (as a contribution to discussion about what SML is and it’s efficacy), and I will do so in an item in the next Newsletter. However, the lights that they shed can also be focussed on the issues raised here. Specifically, their concerns highlight the general problem with language in our field. On the one hand, where language is a problem for competence driven processes, it is not for SML. The clear distinctions between structure and direction and between map and territory in SML provide a process within which people are able to develop their own particular understanding of the territory or field of study. On the other hand, the particular and necessary language of SML is bound to present a similar problem when the context is one in which it is being used to describe and explain the approach to those unfamiliar with it. This indicates two potential areas for research. Firstly, we need to be creative and careful about the words we use to communicate about SML structures - a common sense view about being sensitive to the needs of our audience at the same time as not doing a misjustice to SML principles. Research could make a contribution though; as a ‘natural’ part of sharing our learning as reflective practitioners or, more formally for example, as the creation of an ‘SML thesaurus’ on which we could all draw. Secondly, just as research has contributed to the development of structures and processes within SML, so it could also investigate the kinds of environments, in structural and processual terms, that could provide the most fertile ground for developing understanding about SML amongst those who have not experienced it. This would also contribute to finding ways of helping people to understand and accept that having a particular language to describe and explain SML is important. From the foregoing, it is clear that the meaning of words are defined by the context and their use, as much when we are talking about SML as when we are doing it (e.g. a ‘learning group’ in one organisation may be more appropriately called a ‘development group’ in another). None the less any alternative terms need to be considered carefully in relation to each other. Each contextually specific language about SML needs to be internally consistent and coherent in order for participants on programmes to have the real freedom to direct their own learning. |
We
are a District Council (covering Arundel, Bognor Regis, Littlehampton and
the River Arun, with 14 miles of Sussex coast) and employ around 500 permanent
staff and lots of seasonal and casual staff. This article looks at why and
how we have embraced SML with vigour, considers some of the things we have
learned along the way and takes a peek at what we might be doing next.
Why SML? It could be argued, however, that through SML at Arun, we are encouraging this opening up of our ways of working to involve the Arun ‘community’ in decisions about what is to be done. Two significant parts of this ‘community’ (or ‘stakeholders’), are firstly the people who live and work in our district and, secondly, the people who work directly for the council. Working with and involving the people who live in the area (with a longer-term, perhaps idealistic view of creating a “Self Managed Arun”?) is a fundamental challenge to the traditional process, - that is the formal democratic arrangement of electing 56 Councillors every four years and empowering them to make all decisions, without reference, on behalf of the 120,000 citizens of the district. Whilst we do not have an SML programme in place in the community, we are increasing the opportunities for involvement with the development of polls, community forum and increased accessibility to meetings and information. It is interesting to note, however, that both systems seem to invite apathy. Less than 40% vote and our attempts to involve the community at the stage seem to have mainly encouraged the more vigorous activity of pressure groups. Local government is boring until the by-pass is planned to run through your back garden or the new hostel for single parents is to be located next door! Traditionally, the main concern of our second group of stakeholders, the Arun staff, is with their job, and is mostly influenced by their commitment to deliver the service (whether it be swimming lessons at the pool or collecting local taxes) and in the hierarchy management style of their bit of the organisation. Our purpose in introducing SML is to encourage individual members of staff to think more for themselves, develop their own strategies and challenge some of the traditions within the organisation. How did we do it?
1) I personally
discovered and embraced SML through undertaking an MBA 13) Ian and Ben run set adviser development workshops for 12 of us 14) Sets up and running since January 1996 Thoughts and learning so far
What next?
Looking to a more
idealistic future, I would like to see the SML approach assisting in developing:
This article is a dip into what we’ve done and the opinions are mine. If anyone wants to contact me for more, please do so. Marcia Fellows |
