Praxis

8

I

n Chapter One you read about praxis,a Greek word that means

“action with reflection.” There is little doubt among educators that adults learn by doing something with what they are learning, whether it is concepts, skills, or attitudes. Praxis is doing with built- in reflection. It is a beautiful dance of inductive and deductive forms of learning. As we know, inductive learning proceeds from the par- ticular to the general. Deductive learning moves from the general principle to the particular situation. Both are necessary. Learning tasks can be used as praxis in teaching knowledge, skills, and atti- tudes as learners do something with the new knowledge, work with the new skills and attitudes, and then reflect on what they have just done. Watch how this learning event in the Maldives became praxis.

116 LEARNING TOLISTEN, LEARNING TOTEACH

Lanka. There are twenty-one atolls, each with hundreds of islands that form administrative units for the government. Save the Chil- dren Federation (SCF), an international community development organization, decided to offer staff and resources for community de- velopment work in the Maldives. The government of the Maldives proposed the outlying northernmost atoll, Haa Alifu, as an impact area for the SCF staff largely because government personnel rarely got to visit any of the sixteen inhabited islands of that atoll.

Michael Gibbons and Karen LeBan, codirectors of the Maldives SCF program, invited me to conduct a training program with their small staff.

Here was a development program, with many interagency links, working directly with various ministries of the government of the Maldives, ripe for field training. As usual, our lengthy correspon- dence prior to my arrival included my request for five days on site before the training event. These days were to be spent with Michael and Karen and whomever they named, reviewing the situation, doing a needs assessment, and designing an appropriate training pro- gram with what I learned.

We stressed the need for practical work: these community edu- cators would make theory for themselves by reflecting on active learning. Kurt Lewin said there was nothing as practical as a good theory. I add: A good theory is handmade from action. This meant we would do the workshop in the area where Save the Children worked or someplace where program work with communities was going on. The site named by Michael and Karen was Utheem Is- land, one of the islands of Haa Alifu atoll, a two-day boat trip from Male, the nation’s capital.

I read all I could find about the Maldives. As in so many other instances, Save the Children was seen by the government of the Maldives as a resource, bringing skills and funds to the island de- velopment program. The selection of Utheem Island as the “impact area” of Save the Children programs indicated what the govern- ment wanted: a development arm that had power and resources to

reach across thousands of miles of open seas to Haa Alifu atoll. Did the government of the Maldives see this agency as an educational resource? Probably not. At that time they measured community de- velopment success in terms of buildings constructed, bridges rein- forced, houses roofed. They had, however, recently opened a Center for Community Education and Development in Male. One of the participants in our training course, Mustafa Hussein, was the desig- nated director of that new center. Perhaps this training event could link the concepts of development and education in a new way to catch the attention of the government. To this end, LeBan and Gibbons sent out an announcement to all ministries of the govern- ment, three other private voluntary organizations, and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), inviting them to join the Save the Children training course for community development workers. Through this course they could have a new experience of doing community development through community education.

During the five days of preparation for the workshop, I had oc- casion to meet some of the participants from UNDP and the gov- ernment. John Galace, a bright, energetic Filipino on the UNDP staff in the Maldives, was obviously going to be an important re- source to the entire training project. A young field coordinator, E. E. Wijeratne from the Sri Lanka program of Save the Children, joined us from Columbo, and three young field coordinators from the Maldives Save the Children program were waiting for us in the atoll, having made the logistical preparations for our arrival. I met Mustafa Hussein, the director of the new Center for Community Development and Education, who ultimately made his learning from this training workshop available to all government programs in the islands.

Three ministries were represented: agriculture, atolls adminis- tration, and fisheries. Volunteers in Service Overseas, a British group, sent their Maldivian administrative officer. Language, as always, was a major issue. All of the group discussions during the workshop would be in Divehi, the language of the Maldives. Although tasks

Praxis 117

118 LEARNING TOLISTEN, LEARNING TOTEACH

were set in English, they were all translated into Divehi. You will see how pictures with Divehi titles enabled us to extend the work- shop throughout the whole island nation.

At the time, I saw the whole situation in Newtonian terms with emphasis on separate working parts that had to be put together.

Newtonian principles led my decisions: laws control effective be- havior; we value certainty and predictability; the parts completely determine the whole, so reduce the tensions in the parts and the whole will be fixed; deal with individuals and then deal with the group; hold a here-and-now focus on the actual situation; there is a subject-object split—we are subjects, the world is the object we work on; concentrate on doing, set goals, and achieve results; work on the objects in the world. You can see how such a perception of the world affected our design of training.

A quantum re-vision of that situation respects the integration of people and world. It shows that the whole is much more than the sum of the parts. As I now know, quantum thinking goes beyond the subject-object dichotomy. We recognize all people as subjects in a universe of subjects. Today the principles from quantum the- ory that would lead design decisions are: value uncertainty; be at ease with ambiguity; respect the individual and the group, honor- ing relationships as primary; celebrate that the world is also subject and in a relationship with us.

Quantum thinking helps me see that the tree outside my win- dow, green and growing in the sun of this spring morning in North Carolina, is as beautiful as I see it to be. We do indeed evoke the world we perceive. By spending five days in preparation with the participants in the Maldives, I was actually intuitively living out these quantum principles. I just did not know what to name them at the time.

In Newtonian terms, praxis meant seeing the situation as a prob- lem to be solved, working out the solution, and then reflecting on the outcome to draw conclusions and theory about efficient behav- ior. That theory would then be applied to the next problem. Quan-

tum thinking does not see praxis so much as solving a problem as dealing creatively with a situation that has great potential as it is perceived anew by individuals and the group. The group and the individuals can flourish in relation to a situation that they create as they go. As quantum thinking tells us that we evoke the world we perceive, praxis involves not so much analysis of the indicators of a problem as heightened perception of the potential of a given sit- uation. So the reflection part of praxis becomes not only reflection on possible causes but also more informed perception of the poten- tial of the situation. What a different way of perceiving learning!

The Program and the Process

During the few days of preparation we had in Male before setting out on our two-day boat trip to Utheem, we used the seven steps of design to complete a specific design for the course. We studied the profile of the participants (who)and the situation (why)so that after considering the time frame (when)and the site near the villages (where),we could determine the content of the training (what)and set achievement based objectives (what for).Finally, we set tasks for the participants to do in order to learn the content (how).As we examined the situation, we saw that the development issues in the Maldives called for education in skills and concepts so that field staff could move from a bricks-and-mortar or construction ethic of de- velopment. We proposed a new vision of development as inviting communities to make decisions and raise resources for the im- provement of their own lives.

Save the Children had been addressing this change in develop- ment direction for years, and we wanted to share our insights with other nongovernmental agencies, as well as with government and UN staff. As the new Center for Community Education was in the midst of a project to design a community development manual for the islands, Mustafa Hussein, the director, could certainly use what he would learn here. We boldly set only two simple objectives for

Praxis 119

120 LEARNING TOLISTEN, LEARNING TOTEACH

this educational event. By the end of this workshop, participants would have (1) redefined and experienced anew the role and tasks of community development specialists and (2) designed, practiced, and evaluated community education for development. Mustafa re- marked on reading these goals: “They look simple, but I expect they are not as easy as they look.” Our aim was to offer participants a new experience of community development as community education. It would be a ten-day praxis that would involve direct action in the community with reflection on the theory being constructed by them.

During the ten-day workshop these men and women taught one another as they reflected together on their role in the village of Utheem. They did a community survey and began practice teach- ing. They came to conclusions for themselves. They knew they knew, because they had just done what they were learning. Their practice over time was becoming praxis.

On the first day, participants cited their expectations in response to this learning task: “What do you hope to learn or achieve by the end of these ten days?” They said they wanted to know

• How to encourage the community to develop through their own resources

• How to deal successfully with people

• How to share experiences for motivating poor communities

• How to make other people aware of the possibility of improving their lives

• How to satisfy leaders and laymen at the same time

• How to solve problems they face when working with the community

• How to examine and redefine their work

• How to clarify their own role

Their expectations informed the two general objectives set by us. It is the teacher’s responsibility to set training objectives very clearly and explicitly for participants before the training begins.

These objectives are set in the light of the learning needs and re- sources assessment. Then, in honest dialogue, the teacher asks adult learners what they want and need to do in light of these objectives.

The dialogue begins by design.

In the middle of the ten-day session we set up an open day for rest and relaxation. This gave us, the leaders of the workshop, the chance to redesign and reshape the workshop as needed. We used that day to organize visuals for a complete synthesis of all concepts learned in the first four days. The group artist designed pictures to represent all the concepts. Since none of the course leaders wrote Divehi, a beautiful script resembling Persian, these pictorial con- cepts were very useful, indeed. Ultimately Mustafa Hussein pro- duced a booklet of these pictures for use throughout the island nation.

The island site was perfect for such a training session. We were invited to use the new Mohammed Thakurufanu Memorial Center, which sat a stone’s throw from the village, where participants in the training could go to do needs assessment and practice teaching. This would be excellent praxis. Each of the learning tasks we designed was a means of modeling dialogue education, which we hoped all the participants would learn and adopt. What we did in the train- ing room is what they would do in the villages.

How could they see that the most useful image of themselves was that of teacher of the community, master of dialogue, rather than only a mason or carpenter or bridge builder? Unless they perceived their role as community development specialists anew, the villagers’

dependence on them would simply grow. Our development thesis was that dependency, whether on foreign specialists or on national experts from the capital city, eats at the heart of a development process. Participants’ praxis in the villages had to act in this new re- lationship and reflect on it (perceiving it anew) with the villagers

Praxis 121

122 LEARNING TOLISTEN, LEARNING TOTEACH

and among themselves. This notion of praxis corroborates the quan- tum concept of participation: They participate as subjects in the making of this new theory of development.

Three events during the ten-day training stand out as signifi- cant aspects of participants’ doing what they learned and their new perception—their praxis. The first was the community visits. In their first walk through the small community, the pairs of special- ists were awkward and shy. Even Mustafa Hussein, so outgoing and talkative, was unsure what to do with the women and children he met under the shade trees around the mud and wattle houses. They reported their discomfort when they came back, and we explored new ways they could interact with the community. They tried again and again, and each time it seemed easier and more fruitful. They heard community themes more clearly. They found themselves building a relationship with the small group of womenfolk they found at home each day. This was an excellent example of praxis:

the action-with-reflection cycle that is a natural way of learning.

Praxis offers a special kind of community visit, full of reflection and leading to new, refined visits. It is an ongoing, never-ending cycle of change toward the potential of a given situation. These Maldi- vian community development specialists learned about praxis through their efforts to reach the people of the community.

The second event involved a change of plans. On the morning after their free day, which they had spent on an open boat going to a distant island, participants were not fully present to the learning tasks set out for the day. I tried to set the task and get groups started, but there was simply no energy in the group for the effort. It was 9:07A.M. (we had started at 9 A.M.). “Let’s take a short break,” I sug- gested, much to everyone’s surprise. The group dispersed, some to smoke in the courtyard, some to search for a cup of tea. They were confused by the “break” and murmured questions among them- selves. I met with Le Ban and Gibbons and confessed: “I do not know what to do!” After huddling a bit, we called people back to go out, two by two, into the community to search for more themes, listen

to the people, and continue their community listening survey. They came back after a few hours energized and excited by what they had heard, ready to share their research, ready to get on with the lessons in the workshop.

Here was an example of praxis. What had we learned? When you do not know what to do next, admit it and get some help from colleagues. When energy is low, get people into a physically active learning task in order to raise the energy for learning. Gibbons told me later that this was the best lesson he had ever learned about training and learning. When Mustafa Hussein asked about the sud- den decision to take an early break, we explained what had hap- pened. All of the group realized, in a unique manner, the need for physical activity when energy is low. It was a memorable lesson for us all.

The task we set for the group in order to study the concept of leadership was the third significant event of praxis. It occurred to- ward the end of the workshop. The small dinghy, The Whaler,used to move people and goods to the larger boats offshore, lay on a sandy beach on one side of the island. Its engine had been repaired and was in the boathouse near the large jetty on the other side of the island. The dinghy had to be brought around manually to the jetty in order to move the group to the large boat at high tide at 6

A.M. on the day of departure.

Here was the learning task set to the group: “In this workshop we have been considering the qualities of leadership. Now our job is to move that dinghy to the jetty.” Before the task was explained any further, the group of twelve men and women rushed out the door. LeBan, Gibbons, and I followed to observe signs of leadership in the group. They reached the dinghy and pushed it into the water.

Three men jumped in and began to paddle with their arms. An- other fellow grabbed a long pole and began to push the boat with the pole, competing for a place in the dinghy with his friends. An- other man jumped into the water to push the boat, which was by then quite full. Some of the passengers jumped out and pushed with

Praxis 123

124 LEARNING TOLISTEN, LEARNING TOTEACH

him, and those on the beach joined in. Someone hooked an anchor into the boat, and pulled the boat using the anchor rope. The long haul around the island, through the shallow water, involved almost the entire group. A bright flag was raised (someone’s shirt) and the project continued with cheers and songs. At last the group reached the distant jetty and, in a final team effort, lifted the dinghy onto the beach.

Everyone was laughing and talking excitedly as they fell, quite exhausted, onto the sand. I seized the moment to invite reflection on the learning. What did you see happen? Why do you think it happened this way? It was clear that haste was a self-imposed crite- rion for all the members of the group. Was this how they organized their community development work? Was the criterion: How soon can we get it done? Was that their measure of success as leaders?

Clearly, there had been no design to their effort. Action people all, they set out to do the task as quickly as possible. Time had been lost and energy wasted as the strategy changed again and again. Not everyone helped, either, because people did not know their roles. It was a haphazard venture at best. This action needed reflection. This common practice needed to become praxis.

What did we learn from this? As they reflected, participants con- sidered that the task of leaders is to organize, set out shared tasks, clarify roles, name goals, and set time limits. Leadership is not al- ways a question of sheer sweat. It can be a question of thought.

Nothing in the workshop matched this experience for richness and the potential to perceive themselves in action. A video camera cap- turing that scene on the beach would have greatly enriched the learning potential. We could have played that tape over and over whenever they wanted to consider the responsibilities of leadership.

A voice overlay in Divehi could have made it available to any leader on the islands who had a videocassette recorder. We missed that chance.

We used this praxis to reflect on participants’ ideas of a devel- opment specialist at the opening of the ten-day workshop—a per-