The importance to the individual of collaborating within a group. And the importance to the group in recognizing, and nurturing, the individual.
From: "Amy Chua Is a Wimp" By DAVID BROOKS Published: January 17, 2011 NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/opinion/18brooks.html?nl=todaysheadlines&a... mc=tha212
"Most people work in groups. We do this because groups are much more efficient at solving problems than individuals (swimmers are often motivated to have their best times as part of relay teams, not in individual events). Moreover, the performance of a group does not correlate well with the average I.Q. of the group or even with the I.Q.'s of the smartest members.
"Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon have found that groups have a high collective intelligence when members of a group are good at reading each others' emotions when they take turns speaking, when the inputs from each member are managed fluidly, when they detect each others' inclinations and strengths.
"Participating in a well-functioning group is really hard. It requires the ability to trust people outside your kinship circle, read intonations and moods, understand how the psychological pieces each person brings to the room can and cannot fit together."
This also presents to how "home schooling" can produce the socially-challenged.
Be healthy,
Marc Riddell
The importance to the individual of collaborating within a group. And the importance to the group in recognizing, and nurturing, the individual.
From: "Amy Chua Is a Wimp" By DAVID BROOKS Published: January 17, 2011 NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/opinion/18brooks.html?nl=todaysheadlines&a... mc=tha212
"Most people work in groups. We do this because groups are much more efficient at solving problems than individuals (swimmers are often motivated to have their best times as part of relay teams, not in individual events). Moreover, the performance of a group does not correlate well with the average I.Q. of the group or even with the I.Q.'s of the smartest members.
"Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon have found that groups have a high collective intelligence when members of a group are good at reading each others' emotions when they take turns speaking, when the inputs from each member are managed fluidly, when they detect each others' inclinations and strengths.
"Participating in a well-functioning group is really hard. It requires the ability to trust people outside your kinship circle, read intonations and moods, understand how the psychological pieces each person brings to the room can and cannot fit together."
This also presents to how "home schooling" can produce the socially-challenged.
Be healthy,
Marc Riddell
Heh,
All backwards, her children, hungry for safe opportunities for social interaction, will be sitting at home editing Wikipedia most evenings. Nightclubbing and ski weekends is just not going to work for them. We can look forward to substantial contributions to math and music.
Fred
on 1/18/11 2:10 PM, Fred Bauder at fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
The importance to the individual of collaborating within a group. And the importance to the group in recognizing, and nurturing, the individual.
From: "Amy Chua Is a Wimp" By DAVID BROOKS Published: January 17, 2011 NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/opinion/18brooks.html?nl=todaysheadlines&a... mc=tha212
"Most people work in groups. We do this because groups are much more efficient at solving problems than individuals (swimmers are often motivated to have their best times as part of relay teams, not in individual events). Moreover, the performance of a group does not correlate well with the average I.Q. of the group or even with the I.Q.'s of the smartest members.
"Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon have found that groups have a high collective intelligence when members of a group are good at reading each others' emotions when they take turns speaking, when the inputs from each member are managed fluidly, when they detect each others' inclinations and strengths.
"Participating in a well-functioning group is really hard. It requires the ability to trust people outside your kinship circle, read intonations and moods, understand how the psychological pieces each person brings to the room can and cannot fit together."
This also presents to how "home schooling" can produce the socially-challenged.
Be healthy,
Marc Riddell
Heh,
All backwards, her children, hungry for safe opportunities for social interaction, will be sitting at home editing Wikipedia most evenings. Nightclubbing and ski weekends is just not going to work for them. We can look forward to substantial contributions to math and music.
Fred
And you consider Wikipedia, right now, to be a "safe opportunity for social interaction"!? Please take a closer, more-objective look, Fred.
Marc
on 1/18/11 2:10 PM, Fred Bauder at fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
The importance to the individual of collaborating within a group. And the importance to the group in recognizing, and nurturing, the individual.
From: "Amy Chua Is a Wimp" By DAVID BROOKS Published: January 17, 2011 NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/opinion/18brooks.html?nl=todaysheadlines&a... mc=tha212
"Most people work in groups. We do this because groups are much more efficient at solving problems than individuals (swimmers are often motivated to have their best times as part of relay teams, not in individual events). Moreover, the performance of a group does not correlate well with the average I.Q. of the group or even with the I.Q.'s of the smartest members.
"Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon have found that groups have a high collective intelligence when members of a group are good at reading each others' emotions when they take turns speaking, when the inputs from each member are managed fluidly, when they detect each others' inclinations and strengths.
"Participating in a well-functioning group is really hard. It requires the ability to trust people outside your kinship circle, read intonations and moods, understand how the psychological pieces each person brings to the room can and cannot fit together."
This also presents to how "home schooling" can produce the socially-challenged.
Be healthy,
Marc Riddell
Heh,
All backwards, her children, hungry for safe opportunities for social interaction, will be sitting at home editing Wikipedia most evenings. Nightclubbing and ski weekends is just not going to work for them. We can look forward to substantial contributions to math and music.
Fred
And you consider Wikipedia, right now, to be a "safe opportunity for social interaction"!? Please take a closer, more-objective look, Fred.
Marc
Everything is relative, compared to a Rainbow Gathering Wikipedia is a piece of cake. We have more than our share of people without social skills, at least when they start editing. That is part of what the internet is about.
Not that there are not people who will NOT be socialized; some notable Wikipedians fall into that category.
Fred
Which is one of the main reasons I (also slightly biased as per my background in education) am a huge advocate in public education. It's not just learning stuff (or having stuff "crammed into your head" a la "Pink Floyd's 'The Wall'"), but a critical part is also learning how to interact and socialize with other people who are not necessarily your family.
-MuZemike
On 1/18/2011 1:27 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
on 1/18/11 2:10 PM, Fred Bauder at fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
The importance to the individual of collaborating within a group. And the importance to the group in recognizing, and nurturing, the individual.
From: "Amy Chua Is a Wimp" By DAVID BROOKS Published: January 17, 2011 NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/opinion/18brooks.html?nl=todaysheadlines&a... mc=tha212
"Most people work in groups. We do this because groups are much more efficient at solving problems than individuals (swimmers are often motivated to have their best times as part of relay teams, not in individual events). Moreover, the performance of a group does not correlate well with the average I.Q. of the group or even with the I.Q.'s of the smartest members.
"Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon have found that groups have a high collective intelligence when members of a group are good at reading each others' emotions ‹ when they take turns speaking, when the inputs from each member are managed fluidly, when they detect each others' inclinations and strengths.
"Participating in a well-functioning group is really hard. It requires the ability to trust people outside your kinship circle, read intonations and moods, understand how the psychological pieces each person brings to the room can and cannot fit together."
This also presents to how "home schooling" can produce the socially-challenged.
Be healthy,
Marc Riddell
Heh,
All backwards, her children, hungry for safe opportunities for social interaction, will be sitting at home editing Wikipedia most evenings. Nightclubbing and ski weekends is just not going to work for them. We can look forward to substantial contributions to math and music.
Fred
And you consider Wikipedia, right now, to be a "safe opportunity for social interaction"!? Please take a closer, more-objective look, Fred.
Marc
Everything is relative, compared to a Rainbow Gathering Wikipedia is a piece of cake. We have more than our share of people without social skills, at least when they start editing. That is part of what the internet is about.
Not that there are not people who will NOT be socialized; some notable Wikipedians fall into that category.
Fred
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l