Want to learn about a different way to deal with risk? Be prepared for a large dose of challenges to your identity

Sadržaj

Want to learn about a different way to deal with risk? Be prepared for a large dose of challenges to your identity

4. travnja, 2022.

Vrijeme čitanja: min

Dr. Rob Long, an expert in social psychology, in his latest article deals with the issue of ‘learning at risk’ and had any certainty in learning at all. As he says, he is constantly contacted by organizations that state that they want to learn, especially about a different way of dealing with risks in work, writes the
safetyrisk.net

– After we made the first contact, it happened that they don’t really want to learn and are certainly not ‘ready’ for any kind of learning. In learning theory, curriculum, pedagogy and education, we learn that ‘readiness’ is essential for learning (Scaffolding, Readiness and ZPD in Learning (safetyrisk.net).” It’s also crucial to note that I’m not interested in schooling or training. Parrot, schooling and training are not learning. The shift in knowledge is NOT learning – he notes.

He adds that in most cases when he reads ‘Conversations Security about Learning’, it’s not about learning, it’s about schooling and training. Schooling is not education, and it is most often anti-educational and anti-learning, and it is a cultural reproduction (Apple, Giroux, McLaren) that does not learn. That’s why, he points out, if you want to learn about learning maybe start with Freire or Goodman.

Taking data, digesting it and entering/exiting knowledge – IS NOT learning. Ideas without method do not create learning (The Safety and ‘New View’ Debate (safetyrisk.net). Learning, Leaning and Learning in Safety (safetyrisk.net).

The queries I get are most often managed by the following archetypes:

Gunfighter: he comes to a moment trying to bring down things he doesn’t understand and doesn’t want to understand.
Entertainer: expecting some fun moment, but has no intention of moving.
Amateur lawyer: defends the indefensible and presents hobby law as a professional.
Fiery: begins with a false investigation wanting to ‘indulge’ an answer.
Fixer: search for silver bullets and quick fixes of a vicious problem.
Psychoanalyst: projects psychosis by teaming up only to attribute power to himself.
Engineer: hears problems that can only be solved by measuring when anti-measurement is articulated.
Professor: It comes to a point to realize that the other is stupid.

None of these archetypes really help in learning and they waste time veiled in the rhetoric of ‘learning’. Each of these archetypes shows that the query is not a query, but a false consciousness (‘False Consciousness’ and Perception in Risk and Safety (safetyrisk.net)) that is not aware of itself, warns Dr. Lang.

– Most often when I get a call or someone wants to get involved under these archetypes, the first thing they want to do is confirm and tell me everything they know. This is NOT a search for learning. Every learning requires embodied movement and if you are not ready to move into uncertainty and accept something beyond the bounds of reason, suspend your program (STEP 1, Suspend Your Agenda (safetyrisk.net)), then the query is NOT about learning, but about schooling – clarifies.

In particular, he warns that if someone is looking for learning, one should be prepared for a large dose of Cognitive Dissonance, disorders and threats. In doing so, it should be borne in mind that Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger) is not an intellectual discomfort, but a challenge to the worldview, to your identity.

– All of the above archetypes are not interested in moving into uncertainty, nor trust. Most of the inquiries I receive are not interested in any of the above and thus return to what is certain: paperwork, systems, hazards, controls and management. This is an archetype of safety as an archetype (safetyrisk.net). But there is no certainty in learning- concludes Dr. Rob Long.