Needs of the Public
Craig Sones Cornell
clarity, protection, and integrity if we abandon certification of
trainers?
Curiously, Craig.
Conal Elliott
Craig Sones Cornell
II have spent the last hour or so perusing the site you suggested
below. It is one of the most innovative and useful models for
exchange, growth, and connection in the NVC universe. It enthuses me
about the possibilities it offers.
I have some concerns about the focus on self-learning and evaluation.
I believe that mastery comes from modeling and working with a mentor
or mentors and been submitted to a process that includes rigorous
feedback. I have little confidence in those who are self-taught in a
field of complexity. I also as John Q public do not have the skills or
perspective from which to evaluate an NVC practitioner. Some one
saying they are would not have given me useful information or
protection. I get that practitioners and those who are “certified
trainers” require continuing practice for growth, competence, and
evolution. This is a lifetime practice. All of the suggestions for
making it to “certified trainer” are suggestions. How does an outside
person know if the suggestions were followed by a practitioner or if
he or she taken any of them.
As to the need for integrity, I have two problems. The site asks :”How
do we preserve the integrity of the NVC process? Our answer is that we
don't need to.”
First, the integrity need I was referring to in my inquiry was not of
the process but to the outsider. How does an outsider get any
assurance that the practitioner is anything but what he or she says he
or she is?
Second, sure NVC will and has evolved. It is amusing to me that needs
were not in the earlier version. I got in touch with NVC from the
first Nonviolent Communication published without a chapter on self-
empathy. And certification or whatever does not guaranty that the
practitioner has kept up with the evolution. That is a problem for
John Q. In most certification systems, there is a continuing education
requirement. More or less effective, but of some usefulness. Perhaps
something like that could be instituted. A certain amount of advanced
training online, in workshops, etc. on a continuing basis. Though I
doubt that would meet with approval from many trainers and candidates.
That is enough for now, Craig.
On Sep 7, 1:28 am, "Conal Elliott" <co...@conal.net> wrote:
> some are described athttp://emergence.awakeningcompassion.com/
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug Johnson
Did you also study the "slashdot.com" article mentioned? It goes to great length explaining how the
assessment process works when "everyone" is an assessor. I'm curious as to what detail Conal has
gone into developing his notions...
Doug
>
Craig Sones Cornell
I don't remember that specific site. I will check it out. Thanks.
Craig
Craig Sones Cornell
Craig Sones Cornell
global warming. What is the specific link to the article you are
refering to?
Craig
Doug Johnson
Doug
http://slashdot.org/faq/com-mod.shtml#cm520
> .
>
Craig Sones Cornell
evaluating posts a lot. It seems like a creative way for an online
chat group to monitor abusers. I am not sure how it applies to
evaluating traners, though, outside of site like slashdot. Please help
me understand how the system translates to my question about how to
protect the public's needs.
Curious, Craig.
Doug Johnson
That's kind of why I asked Conal to elaborate on his concepts for implementing some kind of
"everyone is an assessor" type scheme.
In general I can envision some way of everyone in the NVC community rating whomever they have any
kind of contact with. These ratings, with or without explanatory content would be available in a
public way... on a web site perhaps. I imagine some kind of registration might be useful in order to
decrease "spam" ratings and nonsensical evaluations. I wonder if "components" of the NVC process
might be evaluated separately so that ratings on "empathy", "connection", "attunement",
"ego-lessness", "understanding", "flexibility", "skill", etc.
What this might encourage is more intermingling among those of us into NVC practice of all kinds...
practice groups, informal visitations, workshops, teleconferencing, etc.
So... we might even do this here in the "evolves" group... come up with a set of rating scales and
apply them to each other. OR, if this is too jackal, maybe a simple rank ordering of those NVC folk
with whom we've had any experience at all might be useful. I can imagine a web site with each of our
names and our rankings of all the NVC folk we know. It would be searchable so that any NVCer's name
could be found ranked by all those who have included the person in their ranking. In that way we
could each see how others fit each other into some quality order.
For example:
Doug's ranking of those NVCers he has had some kind of experience with:
1. Marshall Rosenberg
2. Robert Gonzales
3. Miki Kashtan
(I'm being discrete here by not expanding this list as far as I could!)
I'm sensing that it is really hard to NOT be jackling while making quality judgments about NVC
performance. Aren't these a kind of moral judgment so that we end up attempting to find the mildest
forms of jackalisms? (standard NVC certification, attending workshops offered by leading lights,etc.)
Doug
Craig Sones Cornell wrote:
> Hi Doug, This is Craig:
>
> I went to the slashdot link you gave below. I liked the system of
> evaluating posts a lot. It seems like a creative way for an online
> chat group to monitor abusers. I am not sure how it applies to
> evaluating traners, though, outside of site like slashdot. Please help
> me understand how the system translates to my question about how to
> protect the public's needs.
>
> Curious, Craig.
>
> On Sep 7, 1:45 pm, Doug Johnson <winds...@cei.net> wrote:
>> Craig, try this one out... it's the "slashdot explanation" mentioned in Conal's web site.
>> Doug
>>
>> http://slashdot.org/faq/com-mod.shtml#cm520
>>
>>
>>
>> Craig Sones Cornell wrote:
>>> Hi Doug, This is Craig:
>>> I went to slashdot.com, but the only info on the front page was about
>>> global warming. What is the specific link to the article you are
>>> refering to?
>>> Craig
>>> On Sep 7, 12:08 pm, Doug Johnson <winds...@cei.net> wrote:
>>>> Craig,
>>>> Did you also study the "slashdot.com" article mentioned? It goes to great length explaining how the
>>> .- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> >
>
> .
>
Craig Sones Cornell
I am enjoying the clarity that your examples and questions bring to
the question of evaluation. However, the initial question was not
about a check list or ranking of existing trainers but how to take a
person from interest and skills in NVC to being a trainer. How do we
protect the public’s needs that a trainer has sufficient mastery to
offer the fullness of NVC, not perfectly if there is such a thing, but
competently and with integrity. The slashdot method or ranking or
simple evaluations are not sufficient in my experience. The process of
mastery of NVC is too complex and dynamic. It requires old birds who
teach young birds to fly to paraphrase CS Lewis, mentoring if you
will.
I am curious how you and others respond to this?
All the best, Craig.
Susan L
integrity. This is why I don't participate in the assembly-line CNVC
certification process - either the one that was suspended or the one
that is being implemented. I don't believe my skills and
consciousness can be assessed based on some essays and videotape
images by someone who doesn't know me and hasn't worked with me.
However, that being said, it is difficult to imagine how NVC could be
introduced into "underserved" areas without a system for certifying
indigenous trainers that doesn't require face-to-face connection with
a mentor. Do you have any suggestions? Peace and Love, Susan
Livingston
On Sep 9, 10:14 am, Craig Sones Cornell <st...@craigsonescornell.com>
wrote:
Conal Elliott
Craig: Seeing words like "mastery", "complex", "needs that", and "it requires" below, I strongly suspect that some habitual assumptions are holding you back from seeing simple, liberating alternatives. I also wonder what "experience" you are referring to with slashdot and/or similar systems, and I hope you and others can separate the bottom-up slashdot paradigm from one-dimensionality ranking. (Though even 1D is richer than certified/uncertified.)
I'm interested in creative ideas and/or specific observations from which others can draw their own conclusions. When I hear _opinions_ about what works and what doesn't (e.g., "not sufficient", "too complex", "it requires", "mastery comes from"), my interest & engagement plummet.
By the way, there's a group specifically intended to discuss these issues -- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/emergence-of-nvc/. I'd be more motivated to discuss these topics on that list, since I expect that (a) people there have particular interest and (b) others will find it more easily when arriving later to the conversation.
- Conal
"At first people refuse to believe that a strange new thing can be done. Then they begin to hope it can be done. Then they see it can be done. Then it is done and all the world wonders why it was not done centuries ago." Frances Hodgson Burnett
Doug Johnson
Reply to Conal... would you be willing to continue on this group with this topic because it is about
NVC evolving AND there are folks here interested in discussing this? (There is no recent activity in
the group you mention.)
Reply to Conal...What liberating alternatives are you alluding to in your response to Craig?
Reply to Craig... NVCers could be ranked on "Empathy felt with this person", "knowledge of NVC
principles", etc, so there are available multi-dimensional rankings... And rankings allow one to
make coices about the kind and degree of competency one is interested in.
Doug
> <mailto:winds...@cei.net>> wrote:
> > >> Craig, try this one out... it's the "slashdot explanation"
> mentioned in Conal's web site.
> > >> Doug
> >
> > >>http://slashdot.org/faq/com-mod.shtml#cm520
> >
> > >> Craig Sones Cornell wrote:
> > >>> Hi Doug, This is Craig:
> > >>> I went to slashdot.com <http://slashdot.com>, but the only
> info on the front page was about
> > >>> global warming. What is the specific link to the article you are
> > >>> refering to?
> > >>> Craig
> > >>> On Sep 7, 12:08 pm, Doug Johnson <winds...@cei.net
> <mailto:winds...@cei.net>> wrote:
> > >>>> Craig,
> > >>>> Did you also study the "slashdot.com <http://slashdot.com>"
Conal Elliott
I like your invitation. I may have missed how the topic is about _NVC_ evolving, as opposed to how _NVC sharing_ evolves.
The emergence-of-nvc group has its own pattern of activity and lulls. I take its rhythm to indicate the degree of interest in its topic. At first, I was on a crusade to preach & goad toward organic, bottom-up (Life-inspired) alternatives to what I see in the NVC community. Now I'm content to just have the message out there and see who shows up and what energy they bring to making the paradigm shift.
I'd rather not spell out my own ideas for "liberating alternatives" any more than I already have in the Emergence site and yahoo group and on the NVC Evolves blog and google group (or in repetition). I prefer offering hints & inspirations, so that (a) people discover and therefore understand for themselves and (b) so I can learn from others' creativity and perspective relatively uncluttered from my own.
I'm glad to have you here. Take care,
- Conal