Image obtained from IMSI's Master Photos Collection, 1895 Francisco Blvd. East, San Rafael, CA 94901-5506, USA.

Note to Readers: This article is a continuation of an article that began in Meridian's Summer 2000 issue. If you are not already familiar with this project, you may want to review the previous two installments before you begin reading this update.

Introduction to Living Article (Summer 2000)
Update on the Living Article (Winter 2001)

Information about Carol Gilligan
(http://www.awards.heinz.org/
gilligan.html)

As was noted in the last update, we are continuing to attempt a new form of academic discourse through the development of this article. It is our hope that as we continue, more of you will become involved in contributing to this project. The responses to this article remain small in quantity but of excellent quality. Unfortunately, since our last update, we have received only one substantive response. Others (which we greatly appreciate) were simply acknowledgments of the usefulness of the information presented.

The focus of this installment will be a commentary on the response that we received to our last update. We hope that this discussion will generate additional ideas and responses and that the eventual result will be a reformulation of the original piece.

Response to Winter 2001 Update

For more information on Invitational Education:

International Alliance for Invitational Education
(http://www.invitationaleducation.net/)

Creating Safe Schools Through Invitational Education
(http://ericcass.uncg.edu/digest/
purkey.html)

What is Invitational Education?
(http://www.invitationaleducation.
net/ie/ie.htm)

An Introduction to Invitational Theory
(http://www.invitationaleducation.
Net/ie/ie_intro.htm)

Commentary: Inviting Development

Dr. Purkey's comments correctly highlight the incompleteness of our original article. In focusing on a cognitive developmental model as the basis of our approach, I believe that we laid the foundation for conditions that might be considered necessary but not sufficient for healthy development. I believe that we can benefit from exploring a number of possible approaches to the concerns expressed in our original piece and hope that others may contribute ideas from additional theoretical orientations.

While we certainly hoped that the concept of "care" was implicit in our discussion, it may be more appropriate to focus on this concept explicitly when discussing how best to educate students in a way that promotes the healthiest possible development. After all, if we hope that our efforts will lead students to care for themselves and others, is there a better way to convey this to them than to model it ourselves? Invitational Education offers an explicit model for putting this concept of care into practice in educational environments. Rather than assuming that caring will take place and making the concept implicit (as we did in our earlier discussion), Invitational Education centers around the importance of intentionality in developing a caring and inviting educational environment. There are five basic assumptions upon which Invitational Theory is based (see "What is Invitational Education?" and "An Introduction to Invitational Theory" for a more complete discussion of this theory). One of these assumptions is as follows:

"Human potential can best be realized by creating and maintaining places, policies, processes and programs specifically designed to invite development, and by people who are intentionally inviting with themselves and others, personally and professionally ("The Five P's")." (IAIE, 2001)

Additionally, Purkey (1999) states in his conclusion to "Creating Safe Schools Through Invitational Education":

"Rather than relying on one program, one policy, or one process, Invitational Education addresses the total zeitgeist, the spirit within a school. It has a wider focus of application than traditional efforts to make schools safe. It is concerned with more than grades, attendance, academic achievement, discipline, test scores, and even student self-esteem. It is concerned with the skills of becoming a decent and productive citizen in a democratic society."

These goals echo the concerns that were stated at the beginning of this project and bring us back to the original questions. How do we use technology to achieve these goals? However, rather than leaving us with the same unanswered questions, the addition of Invitational Theory to this discussion may help us to refocus some of the original questions. It may be helpful to think about how technology might be applied to the "Five P's". In other words, we might consider the ways in which technology can be used as a tool to make places, policies, processes and programs more inviting to the people involved in the educational process.

An Invitation to Comment

Now that you've had a chance to explore Invitational Theory and to think again about the cognitive developmental model we presented earlier within the context of using technology as a tool for healthy development among adolescents, we invite you to contribute your comments. Are you aware of specific programs that have successfully used technology in this way? Do you want to propose a program of your own? Do you have ideas about other theoretical models that might be instructive in this discussion? Do you want to comment on the usefulness of the models already presented? Please send any and all comments regarding this project to Meridian with the words "Living Article" in the subject line. We look forward to continued collaboration with you.

Current Issue | Editorial Board | Reader Survey | Special Honors
Submissions | Resources | Archive | Text Version | Email
NC State Homepage

Meridian: A Middle School Computer Technologies Journal
a service of NC State University, Raleigh, NC
Volume 4, Issue 2, Summer 2001
ISSN 1097-9778
URL: http://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/sum2001/living/index.html
Contact Meridian
All rights reserved by the authors.

Meridian is a member of the GEM Consortium