Discussion: View Thread

MG-ED-DV Digest - 3 May 1999 to 4 May 1999 (#1999-118)

  • 1.  MG-ED-DV Digest - 3 May 1999 to 4 May 1999 (#1999-118)

    Posted 05-05-1999 07:42
    Training is imparting the currently accepted standards for conduct in a
    particular behavioral domain.

    Teaching is act of delivering information regarding the current or
    forecasted future application of knowledge in a selected intellectual domain.

    Education is the cooperative effort between teacher and student to
    effectively inculcate the current state of knowledge and to develop a schema
    for integrating new knowledge into the student's intellectual skill set.

    David V. Rudd
    Assistant Professor of Marketing
    School of Business and Economics
    Michigan Technological University
    At 12:59 AM 5/5/99 -0400, you wrote:
    >Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 00:59:44 -0400
    >Reply-To: Management Education and Development Discussion
    <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
    >Sender: Management Education and Development Discussion
    <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
    >From: Automatic digest processor <LISTSERV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
    >Subject: MG-ED-DV Digest - 3 May 1999 to 4 May 1999 (#1999-118)
    >To: Recipients of MG-ED-DV digests <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
    >
    >There are 6 messages totalling 335 lines in this issue.
    >
    >Topics of the day:
    >
    > 1. Teaching definitions (2)
    > 2. Definitions and Payscales
    > 3. Useless & Useful Humor in B-School
    > 4. Is this a team? (2)
    >Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 00:09:42 +0800
    >From: Facilitated Solutions <tedebear@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
    >Subject: Re: Teaching definitions
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
    >
    >At 10:19 am 2/05/99 Ana wrote:
    >>For the purpose of my PhD, I need to know the difference in
    >>definitions (not just from the dictionary!) of the
    >>following three words:
    >>- Teaching
    >>- Educating
    >>- Training
    >
    >Ana, we covered this just last week. I'll only touch on the last two
    >because we were looking at:
    > Training
    > Education
    > Development
    >
    >The view that I propose involves the "time factor":
    > Training ~ a skill is need NOW
    > Education ~ knowledge is needed for the FUTURE
    > Development ~ whole person learning for LIFE
    >
    >Just my tuppence worth.
    >
    >Alan :-)
    >
    >PS: BTW, I'm in Perth, Western Australia and my doctor comes from
    >Nottingham. It's a small world!!!
    >----------------------------------------------------------
    > Alan Wilson ~ Facilitated Solutions
    > Speaker & Trainer to the Meetings Industry
    >----------------------------------------------------------
    >Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 10:22:12 -0400
    >From: "John L. Naman" <naman+@PITT.EDU>
    >Subject: Definitions and Payscales
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    >
    >> I have noticed that those who instruct in the K-12 environment are
    referred to as
    >"teachers," and those who instruct in post-secondary community college
    >contexts are called "instructors." (Only in senior colleges and
    >universities do we get into "professor" levels.) I don't know what
    >significance this difference has.
    >
    >The significance in the city I live in is:
    >
    >Teacher (K-12) pay ranges upwards of $89,000
    >
    >Instructor pay (coll & univ) is around $1,600/3-credit course. A 24 credit (8
    >course) load = $12,800, which is below the poverty line ($16,000) for a family
    >of 4.
    >
    >Asst profs come in between $27,000 (philosophy) to $120,000 (finance), with a
    >reported mean of $48,000 (Chron Higher Educ, circa April 15) with a load of
    >12-16 credits.
    >
    >Now do you see the difference?
    >Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 12:58:02 -0400
    >From: Barry Armandi <armandi@IBM.NET>
    >Subject: Re: Useless & Useful Humor in B-School
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
    >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    >
    >Martin,
    >Sorry for the late request but was having trouble with my email. Also. I
    >apologize for sending this to the whole list. Could you send
    >me a copy or reference to that transcript? Thanks.
    >Barry
    >Barry Armandi
    >Dept. of Management
    >SUNY- Old Westbury
    >Old Westbury, NY 11568
    >
    >----------
    >> From: Martin Martens <martinl@UNIXG.UBC.CA>
    >> To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
    >> Subject: Re: [MG-ED-DV] Useless & Useful Humor in B-School
    >> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 3:01 PM
    >>
    >> This has been quite an interesting thread and I'd like
    >> to add my 2 cents as a Ph.D. student by sharing a
    >> past incident and an example that I believe are relevant
    >> to the subject.
    >>
    >> Dutch's comment about pressure and prestige reminded
    >> me of an incident from a Ph.D. course. As part of the class,
    >> I was teaching the subject of the day. At one point I was up
    >> at the chalk board writing some comments when I misspelled
    >> a word, realized it, and when I went back to fix it, I made
    >> a comment to my Ph.D. cohorts in the class something along
    >> the lines of 'It would be nice to have a chalk board that does
    >> automatic spell checking.' They laughed and the class went
    >> on from there. I really didn't think much of it. After the class, I
    >> was chided by the course instructor for making the comment.
    >> The instructor felt that it showed a lack of professionalism to
    >> use that type of humor in front of a class.
    >>
    >> Somewhat of a side note, I'm dyslexic and continually misorder
    >> the letters of words as I write them down.
    >>
    >> The example is what I use to start a class on communication.
    >> I begin the class by asking students for all of the different
    >> definitions of the word "right." I write these definitions up
    >> on the board as they are called out and usually end up
    >> with a list of 10-12 different definitions.
    >>
    >> I then read a transcript of a conversation between the pilot
    >> of flight GIA 152 and air-traffic control in Indonesia. The
    >> transcript is fairly short and it becomes quickly obvious that
    >> the pilot and the air traffic controller are confused over the
    >> word "right" and are using different meanings.
    >>
    >> Every time I have read this transcript, my students begin to
    >> laugh at the apparent confusion between the pilot and the
    >> air controller over the meaning of the word "right." The
    >> conversation is somewhat similar to a famous Lucille Ball
    >> scene where she and Ricky become confused over the
    >> same word.
    >>
    >> How does this relate to humor? I think that because I have
    >> previously used what I consider to be appropriate humor
    >> in the course I have set up an expectation in my students that
    >> what I am reading is or will result in a humorous ending. That a
    >> large number of students begin to laugh, perhaps nervously,
    >> perhaps not, it indicates that this might be their expectation.
    >>
    >> The last two lines of the transcript read:
    >>
    >> Pilot: (Pause) "Confirm turning left? We are starting turning right now."
    >>
    >> Controller: "OK (pause) OK. GIA 152 continue turn right heading 015."
    >>
    >>
    >> At this point, I stop, pause, look up at my students and say
    >> (approximately):
    >>
    >> "There were no further transmissions from GIA 152. In the confusion the
    >> pilot had turned right into a mountain and killed everyone on board."
    >>
    >> This unexpected ending to the story shocks them into silence.
    >> In every class, the students looked stunned. I leave it at that and
    >> after a minute or so, go into the rest of the class. The students are
    >> required to write a journal for each class and the transcript dominates
    >> the journal entries for this class.
    >>
    >> If I did not use humor in previous classes, I don't think that this
    >> transcript would have such an impact. The expected humor and
    >> the resulting contrast is quite useful and has a powerful impact.
    >Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:11:48 -0400
    >From: Sharon Livesey <livesey@MARY.FORDHAM.EDU>
    >Subject: Re: Teaching definitions
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
    >
    >There's an article in Rethinking Mgmt Education by Robert French and
    >Christopher Grey (Eds) that may be interesting - actually several, but the
    >one that touches on the diff between education and training is "Can
    >Managment Education be Educational?" by Thomas and Anthony.
    >
    >Sharon Livesey
    >Fordham University
    >
    >At 12:09 AM 5/4/99 +0800, you wrote:
    >>At 10:19 am 2/05/99 Ana wrote:
    >>>For the purpose of my PhD, I need to know the difference in
    >>>definitions (not just from the dictionary!) of the
    >>>following three words:
    >>>- Teaching
    >>>- Educating
    >>>- Training
    >>
    >>Ana, we covered this just last week. I'll only touch on the last two
    >>because we were looking at:
    >> Training
    >> Education
    >> Development
    >>
    >>The view that I propose involves the "time factor":
    >> Training ~ a skill is need NOW
    >> Education ~ knowledge is needed for the FUTURE
    >> Development ~ whole person learning for LIFE
    >>
    >>Just my tuppence worth.
    >>
    >>Alan :-)
    >>
    >>PS: BTW, I'm in Perth, Western Australia and my doctor comes from
    >>Nottingham. It's a small world!!!
    >>----------------------------------------------------------
    >> Alan Wilson ~ Facilitated Solutions
    >> Speaker & Trainer to the Meetings Industry
    >>----------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 08:32:17 +0800
    >From: "Patrick S.W.Fong" <BSPAFONG@POLYU.EDU.HK>
    >Subject: Is this a team?
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
    >
    >Dear All,
    >
    >I have the following situation that would appreciate your
    >comments/suggestions.
    >
    >I have recently been challenged that the following situation can not be
    >classified as a TEAM.
    >
    >I try to examine learning issues among members in construction project
    >teams of which members come from different organizations (occasionally some
    >members can come from the same organization) and different professional
    >backgrounds. For example, an architect from Company A, a services engineer
    >from Company B, a structural engineer from Company C, a surveyor from
    >Company D, an owner from Company E and so on so forth. They only come
    >together for a specific project with a specific timeframe.
    >1. Can I call this a team?
    >2. Are there past research/publications referring to these kind of
    >multidisciplinary team settings where the team will disband when the
    >project completes. Of course, people may work together again in future on
    >other projects.
    >3. Can learning be built up through this type of "temporal team"?
    >4. If I want to study the learning interaction among these team members,
    >should I study it as a longitudinal study or can I study it like a
    >snapshot, i.e. as critical incidents?
    >
    >I would appreciate very much you insights into these issues. Please e-mail
    >me privately your responses.
    >
    >Thanks and regards.
    >
    >Patrick Fong
    >
    >__________________________________________________________
    >Patrick S.W. Fong
    >Assistant Professor
    >Department of Building & Real Estate,
    >Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
    >Hung Hom,
    >Kowloon,
    >HONG KONG.
    >
    >Tel: +(852) 2766 5801
    >Fax: +(852) 2764 5131 or 2764 2572
    >E-mail: bspafong@polyu.edu.hk
    >Website: http://home.bre.polyu.edu.hk/~bspafong/
    >__________________________________________________________
    >Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 19:53:02 -0500
    >From: Larry Pate <lpate@BUS.WISC.EDU>
    >Subject: Re: Is this a team?
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
    >
    >Sure, you can call that a "team," but then not all teams are the same. A
    >tennis doubles team, for example, has quite different characteristics of
    >interdependency between members than does, say, a soccer team or a rowing
    >team. Your situation is much like airline crews that come together for
    >short time periods and then typically disband. Take a look at Charles
    >Margerison's research on cockpit crews and other "teams" within Australian
    >Airlines, and I think you'll find it quite interesting and relevant to your
    >research. Hope this helps.
    >
    >Best,
    >
    >Larry
    >
    >At 08:32 AM 5/5/99 +0800, you wrote:
    >>Dear All,
    >>
    >>I have the following situation that would appreciate your
    >>comments/suggestions.
    >>
    >>I have recently been challenged that the following situation can not be
    >>classified as a TEAM.
    >>
    >>I try to examine learning issues among members in construction project
    >>teams of which members come from different organizations (occasionally some
    >>members can come from the same organization) and different professional
    >>backgrounds. For example, an architect from Company A, a services engineer
    >>from Company B, a structural engineer from Company C, a surveyor from
    >>Company D, an owner from Company E and so on so forth. They only come
    >>together for a specific project with a specific timeframe.
    >>1. Can I call this a team?
    >>2. Are there past research/publications referring to these kind of
    >>multidisciplinary team settings where the team will disband when the
    >>project completes. Of course, people may work together again in future on
    >>other projects.
    >>3. Can learning be built up through this type of "temporal team"?
    >>4. If I want to study the learning interaction among these team members,
    >>should I study it as a longitudinal study or can I study it like a
    >>snapshot, i.e. as critical incidents?
    >>
    >>I would appreciate very much you insights into these issues. Please e-mail
    >>me privately your responses.
    >>
    >>Thanks and regards.
    >>
    >>Patrick Fong
    >>
    >>__________________________________________________________
    >>Patrick S.W. Fong
    >>Assistant Professor
    >>Department of Building & Real Estate,
    >>Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
    >>Hung Hom,
    >>Kowloon,
    >>HONG KONG.
    >>
    >>Tel: +(852) 2766 5801
    >>Fax: +(852) 2764 5131 or 2764 2572
    >>E-mail: bspafong@polyu.edu.hk
    >>Website: http://home.bre.polyu.edu.hk/~bspafong/
    >>__________________________________________________________
    >>
    >