Perception, feelings and emotions

Thanks to Heli for the link in her post on quality of connection. I think this was a very emotional talk by Dr Brown. Getting “A”s and perfection in the academia is praised as the perfect achievement of personal goals and academic success.  This sort of achievement seems to be very different from our real lives after “school” where we have to live in imperfection.  This reflects our lives with authenticity and that often leads to a crossing between worthiness and unworthiness amongst us as we “struggle” with life.
Shame, fear, unworthiness seem to be “natural” part of life, and an offspring of personal study, learning, career, family upbringing, parenting, and ageing.  I don’t think people would share these feelings openly in social networks, in fear of personal security being hacked or an over exposure of private life to the public.  These have long term implications – on personal academic studies, marriage, career and reputation in one’s life.

People likes to associate with others who could empathise their feelings and emotions, especially when they are in despair, in vulnerability.  Would such feelings of vulnerability be too hard to share in academia, in social networks, or in open connections?  Why?  That would be perceived by others as living without perfected emotional literacy, critical thinking, in confidence, competent at work, or in personal life.  People would only share academic success but not much on life “failures” because that could lead to shame and fear in his or her life.  Isn’t that the dilemma between academic success and personal life struggles (feeling weak and vulnerable)?

Why would people like Dr Brown feel vulnerable?  Have some of us felt that way in our life journey?

Why would we have to numb our emotions, feeling in face of adverse personal issues or circumstances?  Aren’t we all looking for an optimistic way of living?

Would this be a cultural “issue” or an international phenomena?  The “pretend” issue just reflect what many of us are facing – we are living in a society that is so complex, filled with complex issues, dilemmas, and emotions, and advertising memes that so often we could be both fascinated and overwhelmed with information, power and politics, and personal life struggles.

How would we deal with these in social networks? How would emotional education in our society – emotional control & intelligence help?

What strategies have you adapted to overcome those feelings of loneliness, imperfection and vulnerability?

Emotions and their impact on adult learning

In this article on Emotions and their effect on Adult Learning or
– Emotions are important in adult learning because they can either impede or motivate learning (Dirkx, 2001. p63)
– Entering the cognitive system, emotions are recognized and as a result alter thought patterns, affecting the experiences of how adults learn (Opengart, 2005).
– Learning becomes of value in relation to a student’s experiences and construction of reality, underscoring the adaptive behaviors of learning.
– If people are anxious, uncomfortable, or fearful, they do not learn.
A useful summary paper on emotions in adult learning.
The above article refers to the impact of emotions on teaching and learning in the classroom environment.
How about the impact of emotions on adult learning under an online or digital learning environment? How about learning in a complex social media ecology? Or a blended learning environment.
So, I have been wondering how emotions would impact on learning (social networking and networked learning, in particular) since I attended the CCK08. What would you think about emotions and learning from a connectivist point of view? What were your experiences (emotions and feelings) when involved in online courses/networks (e.g. CCK08, CCK09, CritLit 2010, or any other COPs, or Ning Networks etc.)? What are the connectivist principles relating to emotions and learning? How do these impact on adult learning?


#CritLit2010 Is leadership all about relationships and emotions?

While I was pondering about what to write in my Power of Story Part 2, I was stimulated by this post of matters of the heart referred by Stephen Downes in his OLDaily

I pulled these from Fullan’s new book, Motion Leadership (2010).

1. We must recognize the politics of emotions that energize behaviors.

2. The change strategy cannot create victims.

3. The problem must be named and confronted.

4. Leaders must exemplify the expected standards of behavior.

5. We must engage emotionally with students in their world.

6. Teachers and principals themselves are sometimes actors.

7. The environment must accommodate risk. (Jansen, 2009b, p.189)

I would like to know the basis behind these “principles of leadership”, and here I am posting my comments and questions:

1. What are the politics of emotions?  What are those emotions that energize behaviors? What is the relationship between leadership and behaviorism?

2. The change strategy cannot create victims.  Is this an oxymoron? Every change strategy creates winners, in accordance to leadership.  Otherwise, who would follow?  But who are the victims, who are the losers?  The strategy CANNOT create victims, but it CAN create winners and victims.  History tells us that there is no guarantee of no victims created out of any change strategy.  But great leaders do change the world

Were those leaders crazy? REALLY? Who changed the world? They were the great leaders, the real leaders who walk the talk.

3. Why must the problem be named and confronted? Are problems well-defined?  In whose names are those problems named? Who name the problems? In a leadership situation, is the leader the first to name the problem? Or the last?

4. Leaders must exemplify the expected standards of behavior – wow, that is the tribal approach, sure! The tribal leader would determine what standards of behavior would be praised, rewarded, amplified, or show as an exemplary to all followers, or would declare such behaviors as the heroic action in the tribal manifestation.  Magnificent motto!

5. We must engage emotionally with students in their world – wow! Are leaders emotional counselors or “manipulators” of their students?  Of course students are emotional humans, just like their teachers.  So what is the role of the teacher in their students’ emotional journey?

6. Teachers and principals themselves are sometimes actors.  What sort of actors?  Why? How to act?

7. The environment must accommodate risk. What sort of risks should be accommodated?  How about internet safety?

This one?

or this?

and this one?

Are we (both educators and students) safe in a virtual online environment?

I then read on about this site on distance educator where Saba would separate facts from fiction

My question: Really? How?

This stimulated me to reflect back on the Critical Thinking Skills needed, this time on leadership.

Is leadership all about relationship and emotions? How about critical thinking in leadership? No?

#CritLit2010 Reflection in response to a reflection

This is my response to Ruth’s reflection post.
I like your reflection, full of emotions, revealing the other side of “critical thinking” – the empathy that are equally important to thrive in this era of education and business. I resonate with your feeling: “However I don’t feel very empowered when I am engaged with someone who practices Glasser’s powers of reasoning. The only place I can go with gut feelings is into more feeling and that doesn’t sway another’s mind to empathy. I wonder if minds like to meet minds, emotions like to meet emotions and bodies, other bodies?”
When I learnt about logic, reasoning etc. in my Logic in Maths, in college and University, I didn’t see how it could be reasoned in real life, may be it was too “simplistic”.  Even now, I understand that individual’s logic would often have to give way to the collective wisdom (the team approach) – as we continue to focus more on the vision, mission and use of “objective evidence” which are held as the golden “rules” of institutions.
Leadership, or management are on the other hand, still filled with emotions rather than logic, mainly because that leadership is more about relations, intuition, and not just logical deductions. We all talk about being ambassadors of our institutions, and promoting and projecting a positive image to the community, to the global audience.  Why? Is it an emotional response to our call of “local” and “global” citizenship?  What sort of evidence would we need to prove ourselves to be a good citizen?  Is it critical thinking?  Or is it a result of emotional intelligence?
This trend of emphasising emotions over reason is especially the case when “scientific management” once promoted by Frederick Taylor was once sentenced to be inhumanistic, and are further reflected on the current economic crisis and the recent “meltdown” due mainly to illogical and irrational decision, with greed spreading throughout those businesses. So, what does it mean when we think with logic, evidence and good reasons individually?  Are our individual values in line with our aspirations, our community or our “world”?

From Flickr

#CritLit2010 Is the future about emotions?

Here in this video on Leadership, Motivation Management Training, Patrick Dixon argues that the future is about emotions, and passions.

What’s the most important literacy in our society? Is it one that relates to Passion?  How to engage people in learning and education, in social networks, or at work ?

How do we help people?  What sort of literacies are important in helping other people in building and nurturing their family, at work, in engaging with education, or working and learning with the networks and communities,  or contributing to the society.

What do people care about?

How can we communicate with passion?

Would these be the literacies other than those in Critical Thinking?

How about emotional and social intelligence?

When it comes to success in leadership and life, would it be about relationships?

Here is my previous post on Emotional Intelligence.

CCK09 Emotions and collaboration in networks

Here is a wonderful discussion on Help with Some Clarifications please  posted by Ailsa

@ Ailsa Here is my view on learning principles. We are humans, not “non-human”, so I would like to see more than just firing of neurons, in the connections, but the establishment of human relationship in networks, in the history of learning. At the end, I like to learn with humans, though often technology is part of that mediation (is it part of ANT??). Agents, actors mean differently to different people. At the other end of the network, it is more than a node, it has feelings, “it” is breathing air and taking water (knowledge), and it lives..and is engaging, interacting. That makes human more than just human, beyond behaviorism.

I remember that when I conducted my last class with my learners, especially in my early years of teaching, I always have an emotional response. We have once upon met here together as a learning group or network, and our identities are inscribed in the history of learning. Ten years later, we might still be able to remember each other, as once upon we have been with the same network and learn together.

Would networks be forever? Like diamonds are forever, when it comes to collaboration in the networks.

Roy: Replicator, host, and everyone of us will become history, but the learning and relationship stay forever in networks.


Diamond from theappraiserlady239352613_0b6c293dfa_mDiamonds are a girls best friend 2308596758_5b5f87f767_mDiamonds are the girls best friends (from Fickr)