IESD with majors/minors v Multitudes of programs

This is an important discussion that's been surfacing ever since the first independent ROC came into being. The essence of the discussion is whether or not we think of Gaia University as focussing on one core meta program, being, for the moment, the IESD (integrative eco-social design) program, which can then have a collection of major areas of focus and minor areas of focus that will vary depending on the individual ROC and the individual associate. This meta program option views IESD as an umbrella articulation of a coherent alternative to either neo-liberal capitalism or state sponsored socialism. The other option is to build a continuously expanding list of individual programs; we might have Green Business, IESD, OLE, Cultural Mentoring, etc. In this case IESD is confined to a specialist subject amongst many others. This chart is intending to open up that discussion with some of the factors to which we should be paying attention. It's probably important to disclose where my preference lies. I am more oriented to the one meta program (which is why we might think of ourselves as a 'university' with majors and minors than I am to the multitudes of programs; however, even as I say that, I realize that there is probably a "both/and" rather than an "either/or" which allows us to benefit from getting the best of both worlds here. So there may be some parallels between the developments in open source software world when forking takes place and there are costs involved in forking that we need to be aware of so choosing to fork is a decision that we need to take with some care. ***So for both options, I'm planning to do a SWAT analysis so starting with the IESD with Majors and minors,

IESD with M/m's
1. Strengths
  1. common core curriculm leading to
    This refers to the dream of a common language that is somehow fundamental to the Gaia U concept. We're seeking to develop a comprehensive, all-encompassing [all sectors, all quadrants, AQAL--Ken Wilbur] language. One big advantage of describing everything that we do under the heading IESD is that we would need to articulate just how everything we're doing connects and when we're gathering content, we'd know that we were gathering linked content rather than separate pieces of content.
    1. focused articulation and development efforts
      We'd all be working to the same conception map.
      1. collaboration for this purpose
        We'd have a lot more chance of working on how to collaborate for that purpose. It has a very different feel for someone to say I'm thinking of (say) social entrepreneurialism as a way of extending aspects of IESD rather than identify social entrepreneurialism as a different field unrelated to IESD.
    2. common language in community
      1. coherent action
        a collaboration around articulating IESD itself
      2. holopticism
        By knowing that we're working on articulating a common language, we would be engaging in coherent action, and coherent action is a big practice opportunity for holopticism. For example, some months ago Gaia U chose to use the S. African-based community exchange system for its complementary currency and today I received a notification from one of the ROCs that's thinking about using a drupal module for their complementary currency system. No doubt, there will be many reasons for thinking of doing the complementary currency system on a different platform. One of the questions is, does doing the complementary currency on a different platform increase or decrease the potential for coherence? This has been a common thread for me ever since the beginning of Gaia U which has to do with thinking about introducing additional diversity. In reference to Bill Mollison, the key to this is to work out whether or not the diversity is useful.
  2. simplicity
    Here I'm thinking of the associate who's looking to choose her pathway and I guess it's a weakness of the multitudes of programs approach that it's very confusing for the associate to see all these different programs with no indication of where the overlaps are.
    1. one program, many variants
      This is easier to understand for the associate and emphasises the core, common-language look and fell
    2. less need for certainty of pathway at outset
      This is the way the original diploma programs ran in Australia and Europe; a person was qualifying in applied permaculture design and then choosing up to two majors and three minors to indicate the specific character of their pathway. Also, as an associate I don't have to say which pathway I'm on at the beginning; rather, I can define it as it unfolds in terms of the two majors and three minors that I select at nearly the end of the program. For example, I could attend an orientation and a specialization course where the speciality is, for example, cultural mentoring. In my year of action-learning, I might find that my project work calls me to work on something different than cultural mentoring as my major so I'd rather identify that new focus as the major of my program and choose cultural mentoring as a minor in order to more accurately reflect the reality of the situation.
    3. fits the '11 projects' thinking
      this idea (which I have been working on for a couple of years) proposes that
  3. sense of community
    As Gaia U grows, it'll be increasingly challenging to maintain a sense of community across the entire network. In my view, this challenge will be increased if people think of themselves as doing separated programs.
  4. encourages integrative thinking
    By holding this concept of the one program with many variants, each ROC would need to be able to articulate how it is intending to integrate fresh material into the overall picture. If we're on the multitudes of programs route, this would not be necessary and the ROC could introduce material that would never get tested around its capacity for integration and this would dissipate our potential for coherence.
  5. Our relative, collective power
    refers to the capacity of the Gaia U community to engage with other sister/brother communities (e.g. Permaculture Institutes, Global Ecovillage Network, ZNet, Green Parties and so on) on a partnership level (as partners of equal standing) so as to have influence and effectiveness in our role of the mycelial connector ...
2. Weaknesses
  1. one horse town (vulnerable) see 'ecology'
    IESD becomes rather like a one horse town which may look from the outside like we have a narrow and limited focus. Indeed, there is a danger that people from the outside would seek to describe IESD in reductionist terms much like some people like to describe "permaculture" as "gardening". This reductionism is a common tendency and we can see that this has happened to the idea of ecology which in its early days assumed human beings as part of the ecology and moved fairly quickly to become a relatively narrow field in the earth sciences.
  2. name puts people off (c.f. 'permaculture)'
    The name, IESD, might put people off just as the name, permaculture, has done for some people.
3. Opportunities
  1. potential large scale, coherent actions
    Firstly on the GU core management scale, I'm looking to create a network-style of operation which allows us to act more coherently as a whole group. One part of this will be knowing what everybody else is up to, what skills they have, and how well they understand how to integrate their skills with everybody else. I think that this process will be enhanced by people understanding that they're all working the same "meta" field, that meta field being "IESD". At the next scale out, I'd like this holopticism/coherence to develop over the entire associate and advisor community of Gaia U and , beyond that, at the next scale, to include all of our allies in the permaculture, green politics, green business, natural health,...fields. This is an essential prelude towards large scale coherent action, by actonists, for regeneration in the world. Again, an articulation or an understanding that we're working to a common flex of patterns {as defined in IESD} would be very helpful for this purpose.
  2. defining a coherent (and operational) alternative to
    Here's a big task and a very important one. On a grand historical scale both neo-liberal capitalism and state sponsored socialism have shown themselves to be flawed systems, especially in their capacity to develop human cultures that are ecologically regenerative. Describing a dynamic alternative is a crucial piece of work and the key is to articulate it all the way through to operational functionality. Along with other action-oriented communities around the planet, this is our job. It's a job which is made, in my view, immeasurably more difficult each time we create a new "philosophical fork" in the theory and thinking. There is a conversation to be had here about 'useful diversity' and the ennervating effect of useless diversity (to which our movements are very prone).
    1. no to neo-liberal capitalism
    2. no to state sponsored socialism
    3. yes to 'liberatarian socialism' ' associationism' 'mutualism' ???
  3. cross-pollination with others in field
    a very useful job would be to identify those organizations and people in the networks that we might be seeking cross-pollination and connection with - an ongoing Social Network Analysis (Krebs) job
    1. libertarian socialism
    2. associationsim
    3. Parecon
4. Threats
  1. over-identification with 'brand'
    By which I mean that Gaia U and its allies becomes so identified with IESD {which may prove to be incoherent in some way} that it fails to build a good reputation and this, in turn, impacts on the reputation of Gaia U as a whole. The remedy for this would be to launch IESD out into the world in its own right where it can be crowd-sourced by actionists worldwide (a sort of wikepedia operation)
Multitudes
1. Strengths
  1. shows 'diversity'
2. Weaknesses
  1. attempts for ROC'S to show USP's encourages irrelevant differentiation
  2. contradicts 'integrative'
  3. perpetuates silos
    1. arts
    2. morals
    3. science
    4. mind/body
  4. dissipates articulation and development efforts
3. Opportunities
4. Threats

IESD
using a table from the original permaculture diploma system to illustrate the idea of a group of topic areas that an associate can travel in major or minor ways during their pathway - we would likely want to modify this list and reword it.
1. Site Development
  Designing and working on their own or another site as a demonstration of permaculture principles.
  1. M
2. Site Design
  Completing permaculture designs for clients paying or not.
3. Administration
  Directing, conducting or assisting consultancy groups, associations and institutes and developing strategies in permaculture work.
4. Education
  Working on curricula, teaching or course work in permaculture education.
  1. M
5. Finance
  Setting up or operating financial systems for ethical investment, community revolving loan funds or other self financing systems for communities.
6. Trusteeship
  Setting up or operating land or property trusts for ethical ends, or designing and running land access systems, or acting as a trustee to permaculture projects to enable them to use charitable status, to raise money and to operate as viable projects.
7. System Establishment and Implementation
  Setting up or operating nurseries, earth moving systems, soil conservation strategies or the supply of goods and services to the permaculture community. Leading and working on the implementation of designed systems.
  1. m
8. Media and Communications
  Creating or operating publications or audio-visual and mixed media aids to communication for sustainable system education in the permaculture and wider community. Appropriate software development.
9. Manufacturing
  Establishing or operating making strategies or workshops producing hardware or goods for permaculture design use. Making available essential technologies through research, development and marketing.
10. Community Development
  Planning, assisting with, or implementing community development projects in urban or rural systems or work with disadvantaged groups.
  1. m
11. Architecture
  Designing or building low cost and low energy use dwellings and structures.
12. Research
  Making a significant contribution to research in the area or field of academic research into permaculture systems and needs
  1. m