Perfect chapter to end on. Especially since the night before this class we spent verbally and openly evaluating our 580 class.
I think we learned through reading this chapter and our short discussion in class the importance of evaluation. It's interesting though, I just read in an article for my 580 paper the other day that although 50% of college and universities report doing regular assessments and evaluations on university issues, only 15% report actually doing something with the results. There's so much out there to change and improve, if only people would actually take the time do go after those things, instead of creating the new thing that will, too, eventually need to be changed or improved.
Instead of evaluating this chapter, this class, or even AHRD, I choose to use this reflection time to evaluate myself & what I want. And through my reflection process I evaluated and assessed my needs to come to some pretty powerful realizations. This program is not for me, and with the help of one of the most amazing people I've met at JMU, I was able to figure this out before it was too late. So, instead of gutting it through this program for another year & a half, wishing someone else understood or could see eye to eye with me, I am transferring programs to what I should have been in from the very beginning: Campus Recreation & Leadership. The program was basically created for someone just like me, and I've fought its existence until now.
Some people may have seen me as having wasted a semester and actually a year, because I will still need to be at JMU another 2 years beginning in the fall of '08. But I'd rather pursue my passion then pursue someone else's and try to make it mine. Besides, in no way shape or form was this semester wasted. I was able to learn things I most likely would not have learned otherwise. I wouldn't have learned about improving performance issues or assessing needs. I wouldn't have met some of the great people I have met while in this program. Wouldn't have heard that Dr. H can cook duck, nor would I have known a crazy Russian who loves the color purple & occasionally leaves out an article, verb, or key concept, shzu kno vhat I'm sayin'? I wouldn't have learned that depression in the work place was actually a big deal or that flexpertise was a word. Learning that sugary drinks, popcorn, & chicken feet are part of the food pyramid wasn't on my original agenda either. Tar-zay is actually a technical term and ex-football players can contribute too... who knew! (JK Jason). I learned that there are a few other crazy folks from the mitten who have ventured down to the lover state & I've picked up on a few more good things to read, too. I figured out that even if the rabbit doesn't spin the way you want it too, there's always another alternative. Latinas are just as beautiful on the inside as they are out, even if they are the crowned champion procrastinator, and no matter your age, you too can be a life-longer learner. Off-roading on private property & creating nicknames like licky wouldn't have been a part of my life and neither would blogging, Wiki's, or Cmap. Never met someone with a fear of bananas & probably would have never seen the sphere. Getting a visual of Marcy Driscoll is priceless along with the insight from Swanson & Holton, two BBFs for life! Most of all, I never would have learned nor understood that there are so many passions out there, whether it be wanting to learn about women in the work place, kids & adults with ADHD, or wanting to get the absolute most out of education. Most importantly, I learned through this semester exactly what my passion was, and further that it is not in AHRD. My mentor said it best with, "Sometimes, the best thing about an experience is learning what you don't want, even if it means you don't learn what you do."
So on that note, thanks for reading, sharing a laugh or seven, and continuing my higher education learning, even if you didn't realize. Good luck AHRD & PEACE out!
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Chapter 17 Reflection
Globalization
Globalization, the global economy... there is so much to it. It's about poverty, wealth, power, technology, expediting processes, increasing the speed of life, increased population, hunger, disease. In my opinion, it's not a good thing. Maybe that's because I'm a simple person & I like to keep things simple. I feel like globalization makes things complicated. However, because our economy is becoming more global, we are able to help and assist those troubled areas. Yet, at the same time, globalization is increasing the issues & difficulties our world is suffering from. It's so sad to believe that our country houses ONLY 5% of the world's population, yet utilizes 25% of the world's resources. Almost makes me sick thinking about it.
Specific activities that could help would mostly be geared around education and awareness. These activities would also have to be related to people's current experiences. I feel like almost all high school & college students should have an international experience, preferably in a third world country. Activities could even involve treating people the way others in the world are treated. Instead of trying to overtake their countries to make them like "us", maybe we should help them accomplish things their way, if we are to intervene at all.
Sorry, but globalization annoys me because people are naive & ignorant!
Globalization, the global economy... there is so much to it. It's about poverty, wealth, power, technology, expediting processes, increasing the speed of life, increased population, hunger, disease. In my opinion, it's not a good thing. Maybe that's because I'm a simple person & I like to keep things simple. I feel like globalization makes things complicated. However, because our economy is becoming more global, we are able to help and assist those troubled areas. Yet, at the same time, globalization is increasing the issues & difficulties our world is suffering from. It's so sad to believe that our country houses ONLY 5% of the world's population, yet utilizes 25% of the world's resources. Almost makes me sick thinking about it.
Specific activities that could help would mostly be geared around education and awareness. These activities would also have to be related to people's current experiences. I feel like almost all high school & college students should have an international experience, preferably in a third world country. Activities could even involve treating people the way others in the world are treated. Instead of trying to overtake their countries to make them like "us", maybe we should help them accomplish things their way, if we are to intervene at all.
Sorry, but globalization annoys me because people are naive & ignorant!
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Chapter 14 Reflection
We're gonna KISS this:
Principle 1: Revolves around the change process. Change is a good thing, dang it! So go with it!
Principle 2: Trust an integrity are a big deal. Kinda like the anchorman, but better.
Principle 3: Organizatioal Development is a Dynamic thing. There are lots of pieces and it takes time.
UREC is a perfect example. The mission drives everything we do and the mission of the division within the university drives everything we do as well. The mission is basically to promote healthy lifestyles & for the division of student affairs is to develop students outside of the classroom (Basically). So, all of our programs, including with how we train & develop our student staff is geared towards those two things. It impacts every single one of our practices & if somethng doesn't align, then it is instantly evaluated.
I think for this one, I am going to call it quits. My roommates cat literally just came up and peed on my arm. One of the sickest things that has ever happened to me (& a lot of sick things have happened to me) and I need to go knife that cat or something! Arr! So, Until next chapter...
Principle 1: Revolves around the change process. Change is a good thing, dang it! So go with it!
Principle 2: Trust an integrity are a big deal. Kinda like the anchorman, but better.
Principle 3: Organizatioal Development is a Dynamic thing. There are lots of pieces and it takes time.
UREC is a perfect example. The mission drives everything we do and the mission of the division within the university drives everything we do as well. The mission is basically to promote healthy lifestyles & for the division of student affairs is to develop students outside of the classroom (Basically). So, all of our programs, including with how we train & develop our student staff is geared towards those two things. It impacts every single one of our practices & if somethng doesn't align, then it is instantly evaluated.
I think for this one, I am going to call it quits. My roommates cat literally just came up and peed on my arm. One of the sickest things that has ever happened to me (& a lot of sick things have happened to me) and I need to go knife that cat or something! Arr! So, Until next chapter...
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Chapter 13 Reflection
I just realized I have some pretty amazing blog titles, huh? Yeah, what can I say, I'm pretty original, like a guy named Robert.... A random tangent, but fun story:
Last year, about this time of year I went to a coffee shop with my two friends Jenna & Calin to get some work done. The coffee shop closed & we stood outside underneath the awning chatting for another hour & a half. Our visit there wouldn't have been as long had a man named Robert not crossed out path. He was an extremely intoxicated bearded guy who had just come from a bar wearing jeans, a cream colored T-shirt with a flannel long sleeve it. We noticed this shadow running towards us rather awkwardly. Well, not only was he intoxicated, but was also trying to run with his hands in his pockets - try doing it sober... you'll see why it looked so funny. Anyway, he began talking to us & told us all about his evening & eventually his life. He had come from a bar down the street where he met a Native American Woman who only had one arm. They kept buying each other drinks, but as he explained he was just a friendly guy & in no way did he have intentions of having "relations" with her after the bar and drinks. Then he proceeded to tell us about some random idea or perspective that he had on something. We commended him for his insightful thoughts and he looked at us, shrugged his shoulders with his hands in his pockets and said very seriously, "It's not original or anything, I just made it up." Now, back to the task at hand.
I believe that change is and is not a changing construct for HRD. Change has to be considered in almost every aspect of HRD. So, change should be a constant construct in HRD processes. However, just in our performance analysis & needs assessment project, we're finding that as we are working to improve & change the process of a program, its naturally changing without our intervention at all.
Similarities, I see that all of them require steps. There's not just one thing you do to change. Every level requires development, one thing to build off of another. To recognize this is the first step in anything. Agreeing to change is making a commitment. Differences, well, the more individualistic you go, the more detailed the development becomes. And the way I see it, one is ground for the next. If you go through individual change, it's the first step in the team process for change & so on.
I feel that teleological & life cycle cover all change. Life cycle covers all things that happen naturally and incidentally. Teleological seems to cover all change that is based around goals. I think that evolutionary & dialectic theory full within this one. If there are scarce resources, then goals would be realigned to deal with the scarcity. If there is conflict and change is a matter of resulting that, then I feel that ultimately this falls within teleological theory because goals are reassigned, realigned, or recreated.
Responsible connection? Isn't this anthropomorphic? Giving human characteristics (responsibility) to a non-living thing (a connection). The responsible connection between change & performance is basically understanding that performance can not be improved without some sort of change. Whether the change be internal or external, something has to happen for other things to happen because all systems are open. A pretty generic answer, but that's the basics & I don't like to make things complicated... like Avril.
Last year, about this time of year I went to a coffee shop with my two friends Jenna & Calin to get some work done. The coffee shop closed & we stood outside underneath the awning chatting for another hour & a half. Our visit there wouldn't have been as long had a man named Robert not crossed out path. He was an extremely intoxicated bearded guy who had just come from a bar wearing jeans, a cream colored T-shirt with a flannel long sleeve it. We noticed this shadow running towards us rather awkwardly. Well, not only was he intoxicated, but was also trying to run with his hands in his pockets - try doing it sober... you'll see why it looked so funny. Anyway, he began talking to us & told us all about his evening & eventually his life. He had come from a bar down the street where he met a Native American Woman who only had one arm. They kept buying each other drinks, but as he explained he was just a friendly guy & in no way did he have intentions of having "relations" with her after the bar and drinks. Then he proceeded to tell us about some random idea or perspective that he had on something. We commended him for his insightful thoughts and he looked at us, shrugged his shoulders with his hands in his pockets and said very seriously, "It's not original or anything, I just made it up." Now, back to the task at hand.
I believe that change is and is not a changing construct for HRD. Change has to be considered in almost every aspect of HRD. So, change should be a constant construct in HRD processes. However, just in our performance analysis & needs assessment project, we're finding that as we are working to improve & change the process of a program, its naturally changing without our intervention at all.
Similarities, I see that all of them require steps. There's not just one thing you do to change. Every level requires development, one thing to build off of another. To recognize this is the first step in anything. Agreeing to change is making a commitment. Differences, well, the more individualistic you go, the more detailed the development becomes. And the way I see it, one is ground for the next. If you go through individual change, it's the first step in the team process for change & so on.
I feel that teleological & life cycle cover all change. Life cycle covers all things that happen naturally and incidentally. Teleological seems to cover all change that is based around goals. I think that evolutionary & dialectic theory full within this one. If there are scarce resources, then goals would be realigned to deal with the scarcity. If there is conflict and change is a matter of resulting that, then I feel that ultimately this falls within teleological theory because goals are reassigned, realigned, or recreated.
Responsible connection? Isn't this anthropomorphic? Giving human characteristics (responsibility) to a non-living thing (a connection). The responsible connection between change & performance is basically understanding that performance can not be improved without some sort of change. Whether the change be internal or external, something has to happen for other things to happen because all systems are open. A pretty generic answer, but that's the basics & I don't like to make things complicated... like Avril.
Chapter 12 Reflection
So, I have to say that one of my favorite definitions that this chapter gives us in from Blake & Mouton (1969) where they said, "Organization development emphasizes the "O" in every sense of the word." I chuckled because my first thought was the movie Office Space. If you've seen it, I need not explain any more.
Organizational Development is a systematic effort to becoming more efficient and effective. In doing so, however, the organization this is usually a long term goal, includes being adaptable, diagnosing problems, among many others. With only those few key terms, it is obvious how this fits into HRD - Goals, adaptability, problems, etc. An organization is made up by its human resources, therefore, without developing HR, an organization can not develop. it is also said that it will unleash human expertise. What about flexpertise? Shouldn't it unleash this as well?!
To be honest, I can't really see any unique aspects of OD in HRD. I feel like it is constantly the ADDIE model over & over, sometimes using different terms. Hopefully we can go through this in class, because I'm not seeing the difference.
The role of the OD consultant is to bring problems or areas in need of change (to be more positive) to the forefront. From there, the consultant provides ideas & suggestions for change & improvement through a well thought out plan based on the analysis. From there, the organization has the option to go with it, or decline it, but as a consultant he/she basically offers educated suggestions.
Again, these phases are basically the ADDIE model, and it seems redundant to go through this again. Analysis is needed so the problem can be found & addressed. From there diagnosis is done, which allows suggestions to be made for potential solutions to the problem. Returning to the collected data for information usually happens. Once a solution and diagnosis option is chosen, then designing the actual plan to be implementing takes place. After every I is dotted & T is crossed, the plan is rolled out & implemented. After the plan has been brought to action, it needs to be assessed & evaluated. The institution needs to reflect on it & make necessary adjustments and use the information from the evaluation to make any further changes. It's a system, so the act of this change effort should certainly affect future inputs & processes. All the steps follow one after the other & one can not be completed if a prior step is not.
I feel like doesn't really manage the systems much as it changes the system. Swanson talks about the taxonomy of performance in this chapter & clearly states that OD is found in the upper tier of that, the upper tier known as "Changing the system". The only way that I see OD managing the system is through providing common goals to be achieved and directing the work of systems within the organization.
Cheers!
Organizational Development is a systematic effort to becoming more efficient and effective. In doing so, however, the organization this is usually a long term goal, includes being adaptable, diagnosing problems, among many others. With only those few key terms, it is obvious how this fits into HRD - Goals, adaptability, problems, etc. An organization is made up by its human resources, therefore, without developing HR, an organization can not develop. it is also said that it will unleash human expertise. What about flexpertise? Shouldn't it unleash this as well?!
To be honest, I can't really see any unique aspects of OD in HRD. I feel like it is constantly the ADDIE model over & over, sometimes using different terms. Hopefully we can go through this in class, because I'm not seeing the difference.
The role of the OD consultant is to bring problems or areas in need of change (to be more positive) to the forefront. From there, the consultant provides ideas & suggestions for change & improvement through a well thought out plan based on the analysis. From there, the organization has the option to go with it, or decline it, but as a consultant he/she basically offers educated suggestions.
Again, these phases are basically the ADDIE model, and it seems redundant to go through this again. Analysis is needed so the problem can be found & addressed. From there diagnosis is done, which allows suggestions to be made for potential solutions to the problem. Returning to the collected data for information usually happens. Once a solution and diagnosis option is chosen, then designing the actual plan to be implementing takes place. After every I is dotted & T is crossed, the plan is rolled out & implemented. After the plan has been brought to action, it needs to be assessed & evaluated. The institution needs to reflect on it & make necessary adjustments and use the information from the evaluation to make any further changes. It's a system, so the act of this change effort should certainly affect future inputs & processes. All the steps follow one after the other & one can not be completed if a prior step is not.
I feel like doesn't really manage the systems much as it changes the system. Swanson talks about the taxonomy of performance in this chapter & clearly states that OD is found in the upper tier of that, the upper tier known as "Changing the system". The only way that I see OD managing the system is through providing common goals to be achieved and directing the work of systems within the organization.
Cheers!
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Chapter 11 Reflection
The organization I currently work for has this mission statement:
"Our mission is to promote and advance healthy lifestyles through participation opportunities, educational experiences, and supportive services."
This guides everything we do, especially our training and development week. We train our staff how to create a safe & comfortable environment, how to have difficult conversations for "teachable moments" and skills to providing quality service. Everything we do is guided by our mission statement and the division of student affairs.
2-4 major implications:
1. There are problems identified only during one person's shift.
2. Through evals & observations, this seems to be the only person who is not performing.
3. This one person has asked for training.
Team &/or group learning makes sense when the gap isn't easily or obviously identified to one specific person or couple people. When there is a process issue or a systems issue, team &/or group learning makes sense. It does not make sense to do that when any of the 3 things above are the issue.
Number four doesn't make any sense to me. At all. For question five though, T & D needs to make sure everyone is doing their job to fulfill the mission and vision of the company. If someone is doing a job and they don't see how it fits into the big picture, then they'll never strive to become experts in what they are doing.
"Our mission is to promote and advance healthy lifestyles through participation opportunities, educational experiences, and supportive services."
This guides everything we do, especially our training and development week. We train our staff how to create a safe & comfortable environment, how to have difficult conversations for "teachable moments" and skills to providing quality service. Everything we do is guided by our mission statement and the division of student affairs.
2-4 major implications:
1. There are problems identified only during one person's shift.
2. Through evals & observations, this seems to be the only person who is not performing.
3. This one person has asked for training.
Team &/or group learning makes sense when the gap isn't easily or obviously identified to one specific person or couple people. When there is a process issue or a systems issue, team &/or group learning makes sense. It does not make sense to do that when any of the 3 things above are the issue.
Number four doesn't make any sense to me. At all. For question five though, T & D needs to make sure everyone is doing their job to fulfill the mission and vision of the company. If someone is doing a job and they don't see how it fits into the big picture, then they'll never strive to become experts in what they are doing.
Chapter 10 Reflection
Expertise is still not defined clearly. Throughout the chapter it gives various theories and ideas for expertise in different areas. Basically though, expertise, or being an expert, really comes down to being knowledgeable enough about a certain topic to have a comprehensive view of many aspects. Also though, I think expertise is all relative to a certain degree. For example, I am the expert roller skater in our AHRD program, but on a national level I am not. Which is part of the reason why defining it is so difficult. Ha, sort of like the definition difference between a mountain and a hill.
Well, I just sort of gave an example of expertise with my skating background. Even when I was younger and actually practicing hard core, I really got it & understood what I was supposed to do based off of my experiences & knowledge & the feedback I had received from my competitions, placing 2nd & 3rd in the nation at age 8 & 9, respectively. Because of all this, I was deemed credible enough to help teach of children of all ages, either younger than me, my age, or even older than me up to about 14. There is even a story on the news about me & I try to teach the adult reporter how to skate. (I remember even as a 4 year old I was annoyed at how terrible he was). But yeah, I was seen as an expert by many, even at a young age... but of course to my coaches I was still very much an amateur.
Knowledge plays a role in competence & expertise & directly relates to them. Knowledge is basically information gained and acquired about the subject/area. Competence is having the ability to perform (in my opinion) to a certain standard. Both combined along with other things make up expertise. Knowledge can carry on solo, competence needs knowledge, but not expertise, and expertise needs all.
HRD and T & D would differ if committed to knowledge vs. expertise. Expertise is more about being able to apply knowledge gained and use it in many ways. A person could acquire a great deal of knowledge, but without knowing how to use that knowledge, they could not be an expert. Therefor, if HRD and T & D moved to knowledge only, it wouldn't move beyond knowledge intentionally and I would fear inadequate training.
Competence vs. expertise is a better battle, however, I think that comptence = standards (the minimum), & expertise = above average. Like in our program, AHRD. Completing the degree with all B-'s would make you competent. However, completing with all A's would lean you more towards expertise. Not saying that a straight A student is an expert, but pushing just for competency doesn't stretch far enough I think. Sort of like Veronika's argument that AP should be the standard issue in Tuesday night's class.
Issues that arise are defining what expertise is and how to measure it. It's important enough that we use it and all have a basic understanding and concept of it, however, its also abstract enough that not everyone can have the same perception of it. This poses a problem. Just like what's the difference between a mountain & a hill, as mentioned above.
Well, I just sort of gave an example of expertise with my skating background. Even when I was younger and actually practicing hard core, I really got it & understood what I was supposed to do based off of my experiences & knowledge & the feedback I had received from my competitions, placing 2nd & 3rd in the nation at age 8 & 9, respectively. Because of all this, I was deemed credible enough to help teach of children of all ages, either younger than me, my age, or even older than me up to about 14. There is even a story on the news about me & I try to teach the adult reporter how to skate. (I remember even as a 4 year old I was annoyed at how terrible he was). But yeah, I was seen as an expert by many, even at a young age... but of course to my coaches I was still very much an amateur.
Knowledge plays a role in competence & expertise & directly relates to them. Knowledge is basically information gained and acquired about the subject/area. Competence is having the ability to perform (in my opinion) to a certain standard. Both combined along with other things make up expertise. Knowledge can carry on solo, competence needs knowledge, but not expertise, and expertise needs all.
HRD and T & D would differ if committed to knowledge vs. expertise. Expertise is more about being able to apply knowledge gained and use it in many ways. A person could acquire a great deal of knowledge, but without knowing how to use that knowledge, they could not be an expert. Therefor, if HRD and T & D moved to knowledge only, it wouldn't move beyond knowledge intentionally and I would fear inadequate training.
Competence vs. expertise is a better battle, however, I think that comptence = standards (the minimum), & expertise = above average. Like in our program, AHRD. Completing the degree with all B-'s would make you competent. However, completing with all A's would lean you more towards expertise. Not saying that a straight A student is an expert, but pushing just for competency doesn't stretch far enough I think. Sort of like Veronika's argument that AP should be the standard issue in Tuesday night's class.
Issues that arise are defining what expertise is and how to measure it. It's important enough that we use it and all have a basic understanding and concept of it, however, its also abstract enough that not everyone can have the same perception of it. This poses a problem. Just like what's the difference between a mountain & a hill, as mentioned above.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)