Dignity in LOs LO21732

Bruce Jones (brucej@nwths.com)
Tue, 25 May 1999 11:28:26 -0500

Replying to LO21726 --
> From At:
> >Now, whether we measure with a two magnitude scale or a million
> >magnitude scale, both quantum mechanics and irreversible
> >thermodynamics have taught
> >us a very important lesson. Every measurement, how tiny it might be,
> >disturbs the system irreversibly. Measurement changes the system. From
> >irreversible thermodynamics we learn something even more astounding --
> >the less the available magnitudes to cover the complete scale, the
> >greater
> >the disturbance of the system. It means that when we use a two
> >magnitude scale, the disturbance of the system is the greatest. (If any
> >of
> >you fellow learners wants me to explain it, just ask.)
>
> >
> >This is what made Mandela such an outstanding
> >leader. He accepted every person as a source of light. This is also what
> >we must do if we want an organisation to emerge into a LO.
>
> Please add a few words, to make clear, that this statement, to which I
> fully agree, does not mean that the attempt to create learning
> organizations is a hopeless and helpless attempt. >
> Winfried

I agree with Winfried's last comment and implied question. As I interpret
the statement : How does size of scale translate to the human experience?

I feel that the arguments raised by At can only deal with the 'hard'
sciences. when measuring the human response to learning, the size of the
scale can only increase the stability of the 'system' of an LO. If I give
a class and only ask, "Did you learn something?", and only ask for a
yes/no answer, I have not scaled the instrument of measurement
appropriately. I am not going to receive an accurate accounting of the
class. If I ask for a rating of 1 - 5, or agree - disagree, I have
increased the sensitivity of the question but not the scale of the
instrument. I must have a scale that is large enough and sensitive enough
to accurately measure the 'system'.

If by irreversible you mean I can not change the outcome of the specific
measured incident, than I agree with you. If you mean that I can not
change the system then I disagree. Isn't that the principle behind the
scientific approach? If I have an adequate scale of measurement (large or
small) I can eliminate or reduce the effect of the variables? Only by
having a large and sensitive enough scale of measurement can I identify
the variables.

When working with the human factor in all respects, not just dignity, the
scale of the measurement MUST be as large and sensitive as possible to
adequately identify the variables. This identification is a MUST to
changing, or at least defining, the system of human learning and thus
LO's. If this is the meaning of your original statement then all I have
said is just babbling in the wind. If, however, this is not your meaning
.... please increase the scale of explanation to enlighten me.

Bruce W. Jones
Organizational Development Specialist
Northwest Texas Healthcare System
Amarillo, Texas
brucej@nwths.com
brucewj@amaonline.com
http://www.scenemaker.com/anon/495/cover.dhtml

-- 


"Bruce Jones" <brucej@nwths.com>


        Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com>
  Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>