Acknowledgments

Preface

The principles of didactic communication

• Communication, Education and Didactics
• The Difference between Rhetoric and Dialectics
• The Forms of Didactics
• Education and Sustainable Development

Bibliography

This manual is a gift of the Italian Government to the people of India.

THE PRODUCTION CENTER, which is a well equipped production facility, organized for responding to the growing demand for audiovisual educational tools.

• What are the "elements" of communication that I need to consider in order to master the whole process?
• What are the "factors" influencing the effectiveness of communication?
• What are the "parts" and the "links" of the audiovisual discourse?

• Communication, Education and Didactics
• The Difference between Rhetoric and Dialectics
• The Forms of Didactics
• Education and Sustainable Development

COMMUNICATION, EDUCATION, DIDACTICS

1.

Imagine a sea accident. There has been an explosion on a small commercial ship. The survivors managed to anchor the wreck in the bay of a tropical island, inhabited by a primitive population. The radio is not functioning. There is no way to communicate with the mainland. The survivors set a camp near the seashore, in the bay where the damaged ship is anchored. The natives keep at a distance, observing. The survivors have little quantity of food and few arms.

The two peoples will be both curious and afraid of each other. Will the others fight? Could we establish friendly relationships? What are the intentions of the others? And how to communicate one’s intention? Neither of the two know the language of the other. But this can gradually be overcome. It is easy to demonstrate friendliness or hostility. But how to be sure that the others are not cheating? "They can act friendly just to hit harder when we feel secure…"

And what is the economic situation? Will the island provide enough resources for everybody? Is it possible to integrate the competencies of the two groups in a way that, through co-operation, both the groups can produce more?

These questions will be answered through communication. At the beginning, mimicry will be used. There will be an exhibition of force with the indication that force may or not be used, according to the reaction of the others. If hostility diminishes, there will be exchange of gifts. There will be some kind of co-operation until, eventually, someone will learn the language of the other and communication will become more explicit. Then co-operation will develop.

The need to communicate is primary with respect to its content. It is more important how people speak, than what people say. Which objects are exchanged is secondary: the decisive factor is how exchange takes place. So what is really important is the relationship: solidarity or competition? Co-operation or hostility?

Between the two groups, it will not be possible not to communicate. Refusal to communicate will be interpreted in a certain way and it will bring consequences.

Each act of communication will propose a certain kind of relationship. When the proposed relationship is accepted by the counterpart, the two parties will start interacting in a mutually acceptable way.

Communication, then, will have achieved its objective of establishing a social pattern.

Imagine another situation.

A group of persons are working at a newspaper. There are different roles which integrate each other: the newspaper proprietor, the director, the editors, the journalists, the reporters, the photographers, the graphics, the typographers, etc. They are all associated in a common business. If the newspaper sells well, they will earn profit, and vice versa, if the newspaper does not sell, they will all lose. In order to keep a specific market niche, everybody in the newspaper complies with the philosophy and the approach of the newspaper. In this period, internal communication amongst colleagues is basically oriented towards reinforcing established roles and duties.

Suddenly an event takes place; an event that is going to change the whole set of relationships. The proprietor wants to sell the newspaper. A big media company shows interest. What will happen? The identity of the paper will change. Shall we colleagues, as an interested group, resist the sale or not? Some people may be fired; others may get promotions. Everybody will ask oneself: shall I side with my professional category, or with those who have the same political view? There will be new alliances, new competitions, new strategies. Internal communication will put forward new definitions and new problems. The new way of communicating will try to set new issues. There will be a boosted flux of internal communication until the majority of the stakeholders will be satisfied with the new definition of mutual roles and the new social role of the newspaper will be identified. After that internal communication will again tend to become redundant and reinforce established roles.

Through communication, the human group has managed to create a new collective identity. That achievement is the purpose of communication.

Imagine a newly colonised land in the American Far West, where people immigrated from different nations. Some are cattle breeders, other are farmers, other miners. They live apart, far away from each other, scattered on the vast grasslands of the New World. At the beginning each family keeps community ties only with people of the same ethnic group or of the same religious faith. Then they start interacting with the neighbouring communities. A small market place develops into a small town. Law and order problems increase. And people start realising they have common problems, which require collective solutions. But how to agree on common principles? And how to establish a hierarchy that can assert authority upon all the members of the group?

Gradually those people will develop a new sense of community, with its principles, its laws, its sense of internal solidarity. Such a social identity will not be achieved once and for all, but it will be a temporary settlement of a constantly evolving process.

In fact the original smaller communities, which get united into the larger identity, will continue to exist, although more loosely. And in its turn the new social unity will integrate into an even larger administrative set up, with its ties to the State … to the Nation … to international alliances.

On the other hand, internal communication will continue to develop the social identity. Collective choices will be taken. The municipality may decide to open churches, schools and hospitals. May be a theatre. And what about a newspaper? And what will be the curriculum of the school? There will be political competition. May be the newspaper will split into two. And the church will make a new theatre that holds Easter performances.

All this is the result of the process of communication. Be it in the context of the family or within the assembly of the United Nations, the scope of communication is always to develop a sense of community, for sharing interests and values.

4.

If we say that a common identity is the objective of communication, we do not mean that communication is prompted by some kind of altruistic community service. Persons communicate to express their thoughts and defend their interests. But the fact remains that when people speak, they want the others to listen. And the counterparts also want to be listened.

Unidirectional communication is no communication at all; and it does not even serve the scope of the speaker.

At the same time, the community dislikes those who are not affirmative, who do not form and defend a point of view.

This means that the objective of communication is twofold: on the one hand, it is the affirmation of the personality of those who communicate; on the other, it is the establishment of a social relationship.

Let’s take the example of the most basic form of sociality: a couple.

They have developed a strong sense of "we". They have created a universe of their own, which stands apart from the rest of the cosmos; that "rest", from their point of view, is almost an alien world. In spite of this strong sense of unity, each person is there to affirm himself or herself, not to affirm the couple as such. And if one of them stops acting in her or his own interests, and performs her or his role in a stereotyped manner, without individual creativity and enthusiasm, (like it often happens in a marriage, if the two take on the role of "husband" and "wife" without creativity), then the sense of social identity will remain strong, but the communication will be frustrating, and the partner will probably complain strongly about this lack of expression.

Without the expression of one’s personality, therefore, there is no authentic communication. And therefore there is no authentic sense of common belonging.

5.

this submission is called "socialisation".

Those of us who have children know how beautiful is to grow little humans.

But also how difficult it is. They are terribly selfish. They want everything for themselves. The smaller they are, the more they want to command. Parents become the "servants" of their babies. They cannot avoid it. Small children cry their hearts out if they don’t get what they want. But in many cases, parents just cannot consent. If children insist in pretending, they get a scolding; if they persist, they may even get a beating. So children gradually learn that by expressing some kind of desires, they will not necessarily receive satisfaction. These expressions will have to be mediated. Children quickly learn to conduct negotiations. Initially, within the family. Later, in the outside world. And with this capacity to negotiate, they learn how to communicate with the others.

What parents do with their children, social institutions do with the members of the social body. We all wish others to do what we like. Everybody would like to be the master. Nobody would like to be the servant. And when conflicts arise, there are two possible methods of solution: confrontation or co-operation. In human communities, there is always a mixture of both the methods; but the proportion varies, according to the barbarian or civilised level achieved by the community. And this difference does not only regard the culture of different nations and peoples. Also family cultures, class cultures, company cultures, etc., are enormously different within the same national context. Which of us did not ever change a well paid job because the working environment was too rough or crude?

In any case, social groups present the rules of the game to the newcomers, noble or primitive as they are: and the newcomer has to comply with those rules.

The acceptance of the rules implies also the acceptance of the codes, symbols and manners. Once these are accepted, the individual can express himself and tell the others what he wants to do and what he wants to obtain. Without the acceptance of the common language, there is no communication; and therefore no socialisation.

6.

A social system has to consider a way to give access to the newcomers: if not to the "strangers", at least to the new generations.

From the point of view of social interest, each new individual is potentially a resource and a danger. She or he is a resource because, once integrated, she/he will enrich the social body with her/his specific competencies. It is a danger if she/he is resistant to integration and if the "intruder" uses the resources without contributing to the creation of richness. So it is important for the social system to organise itself in such a way that the new members get integrated. At the same time, it is important that the capacities of the individual will be valued by the system into which she/he is being integrated, since the value of the contribution will depend upon their competence.

7.

Nature gives us a body and a mind. Some of us are naturally more beautiful, more healthy, more intelligent, more sensitive than others. But what matters is the use we make of the resources given by nature.

Intelligence and sensitivity can be educated. This means that we can take care of our potentialities, understand what we need in order to express ourselves, create the condition so that our faculties can develop.

Each one of us also knows how difficult it is to take care of ourselves. It is not so easy even to care of our own body: to keep limits, to balance opposite desires, to do physical exercises, etc. Even more difficult is it to cultivate our mind. We are more inclined to exploit our resources, than to foster them. And that is what finally makes the difference between human beings: more consequential than what nature has given to us is what we did with it.

But can we learn how to cultivate ourselves? When our capacity of understanding has not yet matured, how can we understand the importance of developing ourselves?

Here, becomes clear the consequence of a society that takes care of educating the young generations. Different social systems adopt different institutions: centrality may be given to family, caste, religious community, private market, state, etc. But the core issue is not what institutions are responsible for educating, nor what they teach. The core question is HOW they teach, i.e. whether education is centred in the development of the human faculty of the individuals or centred in the adaptation of the individual to preconceived social structures.

In both cases, we have a process of socialisation. But only when teaching is centred on the development of human faculties do we have an authentic process of education.

8.

Once we have understood what education is, we can tackle the problem of how a teacher educates. In fact, education is much more than a transmission of information from one who knows to one who does not. Or rather, mere information is a possible method of teaching. But the objective of developing the personality of the learner goes beyond that. So what is the relationship between the method and the objective of education? This question is the starting point of "didactics".

And what is the answer? As is the case with all human sciences, there is no univocal answer. The didactic method adopted will be different in different cultures and contexts. If education is an art, each teacher will develop her/his own method. And the same educator will vary the method according the each learner. Even with the same learner, the method will be changed according to the development of the educational relationship and will be adapted to the specific context within which teacher and learner are communicating.

Imagine a "gurukula", a school of ancient India. It was located away from the main urban centres. Or was a residential school. Learners would have lived under the guidance of the teacher as her/his assistants. The didactic relationship was extremely personal. In many cases, the relationship would have been more intimate than the relationship within the natural family. This intimacy was independent of the form of discipline. It could have been a school of martial arts or a school of kama shastra. The objective was to develop the personality of the learner, to arouse the dormant spirit in her/him, to make her/him ready for the world.

Nowadays there are, in modern India, attempts to return to the "gurukula method". So, residential schools are built in the countryside. And traditional arts are dug up and thought afresh. But the result is very poor. The "method" cannot be applied in a totally different context. Now social relationships have changed. Economic perspectives have changed. Cultural values have changed. How can the didactic method remain the same?

Human nature has not changed: therefore the fundamental requirement that remains is of adapting communication to the character of the persons who are involved in it.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RHETORIC AND DIALECTICS

that is, between the objective of persuading and the objective of educating

9.

Let’s return to the example of the island where a group of survivors from a shipwreck encounter a primitive society. We assume that though our survivors have some modern arms, their small number and the inexperience with the environment makes them weaker than the natives. So the communication between the two groups will be based on the fact that power is unevenly distributed: there is one side which can impose decisions by force. However there are obvious disadvantages in the use of force. A fight will cause heavy damage to the natives as well. On the contrary some sort of co-operation will produce benefices for both sides. So the process of integration of the two groups will bring about the some distribution of benefices. The immigrants will be more careful to observe the customary practices of the natives. They will bow in front of the local hierarchies. They will more keen to respect the local habits than will be the natives in respecting the habits of the survivors. When some conflict of interest will arise, let’s suppose in the division of the territory, the natives will be able to push forward their arguments by a mere representation of their superior state of power.

After a while, however, things may change. Natives will discover that their neighbours have more knowledge on many fields. They know how to treat certain kinds of illness. They can make very efficacious traps. They know how to produce cheese from the milk of goats. They can build bigger and safer boats and melodious musical instruments. They can also represent their thoughts through writing. Gradually, the balance of power will change and the immigrants will be able to reduce their subordinate position and convince the natives to a more favourable co-operation. Immigrants will succeed in communicating that the natives will get more benefices by a fair integration of competencies rather than by maintaining the previous position of supremacy.

This very same dynamic remains valid in all communication contexts. In the case of educational interaction, for instance, the teacher can claim authority either by the clarity of her/his argument or by a representation of her/his position of power over the students.

10.

Let’s now change the traits of the close encounter between two civilisations; the situation we’ve been using as an example.

The newcomers on the island inhabited by a primitive society are not a weak group of survivors. The newcomers are well organised. They have arrived in a big group, are well equipped and well armed. Their ships are many and in good condition. The newcomers construct a town, a port, a fort, a court, a church, a school. They take full control over the island, which is rich in silver ore. The economic and political system of the natives is scattered. Now if they want to survive, they will have to serve the newcomers: women as domestic servants; men as miners.

In this context, the social rules will be set by the dominant newcomers. These rules have to be "explained" to the natives. Power is used to make the native comply. But comply with what? There is need to educate them to the new rules. Naturally, in this case the word "education" is used improperly. It’s better just to say "socialise", i.e. to integrate in the social system. On the other side, the newcomers will have to present, more or less sincerely, the motivation which is at the base of these rules. So, for instance, priests will have to explain the new theology, judges will have to explain the new laws, etc. Even when rules are imposed they have to be divulged. And this requires a kind of teaching, which is not educational in the true sense, but it is still more than mere information.

This sort of superimposition of norms happens also commonly within a homogeneous social set-up, when there is no authentic educational effort towards the new generations but merely a process of institutionalised socialisation.

11.

"Power" is never absolute. It is a relative factor. Power always requires submission.

There are different varieties of power and different manifestations of it. In any case, power depends on the compliance with the orders. Communication is therefore necessary in order to actualise power.

Power has to be "convincing". It may convince because it is capable of obtaining a sincere delegation. It may be convincing because it generates fear. It may be convincing because it offers remuneration. Whatever be the reason, "power" has to convince.

Power becomes entrenched in social systems, once its decrees become social norms. There is no established hierarchy if, each time, there is, anew, the need to convince. In the phase of its establishment, those who aspire for power need to justify their claims, with good or bad means. But once power is obtained, there is no need of convincing for each new decree. Redundancy of statements is sufficient for the maintenance of the equilibrium.

12.

While we are writing this section, a military campaign has started in Yugoslavia. Dialogue has given way to the use of brutal force. Yugoslavian army is using force to submit the people of Kosovo. And NATO is using force to submit the Yugoslavian Government.

On the domestic front, however, all commanders need to justify their choices to their own people. So, Governments are busy in portraying the counterpart as devils thirsty for war; and they come in front of the media describing themselves as angels of peace. Both counterparts accuse each other of genocide. They accuse each other of telling lies to their people and of utilising media for false propaganda.

Naturally, during a war, stands are radicalised and tendencies become extreme. But war is just "an extension of politics with other means". And politics is not done only in parliaments. Each human group has its own politics. In organisations, in a company, in the neighbourhood, in the church, in the barracks, in the school, in the club, in the family … people organise themselves hierarchically and play internal politics. In all groups, those in command need to justify their power in front of the rest of the community. There are naturally different sorts of justifications, as there are different sorts of power. But in any case, the basic justification is that power serves the requirement of the community.

Power has to justify itself as a service. At times this justification may be authentic. In other cases, it may be used as a pretext. In extreme cases, the justification is merely an affirmation of a brutal order. But in any case, it is fundamental to persuade people that this power creates a better order. A power that is unable to persuade the rest of the community about the advantages of its system of order, is a power destined to fall.

We call "persuasion" the kind of communication that people in power do in order to justify their role in front of the rest of the community.

13.

Imagine a developing country, where television broadcasting has recently been liberalised. Two new TV stations are being set up. One is being financed by a multinational company that wants to expand its markets: the objective is to find a way to distribute the TV products produced abroad. The other is financed by a co-operative organisation of a local journalist, who wants to defend the traditional culture from the negative effects of globalisation. Both stations have their right to exist and both cover a legitimate business niche. But their communication pattern towards people is basically different. They both want to influence people. But what they mean by "influence" is radically opposite.

In case of the commercial television, financed from abroad, the objective is to penetrate in a new market by changing the culture of the local people and substituting their traditional values with the models of a different culture. This will diminish the freedom and the dignity of the local people, but may give, at least at the beginning, concrete economic advantages. So, in this case the television will try to exploit, as much as possible, the power of the media in order to convince viewers that the foreign model is a better cultural model than the one they have followed so far. "The new models brings happiness, prosperity, enjoyment, freedom!" In this context all those who work at the station will have to submit themselves to the commercial logic of the operation. If you work in that station, you know what you have to say. You have to be "creative" only in the tone in which you express the standard message. You have to say it with enthusiasm. You have to convince! But you cannot think with a different logic. If you work there, you have to submit yourself to the objective of the station and in this way, you can "teach" the others to do the same.

The opposite is true for the station created by the co-operative of local journalists. Their objective is not to submit. They aspire for a working environment where they can express what they think. They want to make the people of that nation more aware of themselves, more in harmony with their roots. Their scope is to make the people more free, so that they are better able to defend themselves from cultural domination. This may create temporary economic difficulties. But they are repaid by the dignity earned in their effort. In such an environment, the resource is what people think. Creativity is expressed in the totality of the expression: form and content. So, the working environment is less standardised, but also more difficult, because it is more exposed to the confrontation and the discussion of the ideas.

Those who work in the media know how this example is, in reality, a typical situation they have faced many times. At times, the choice between the two modalities presents itself as a crossroad. In many other instances, one has to mediate and find an intermediate position, where commercial interests and intellectual aspirations can adjust to each other.

The difference of approach to external communication reflects on the team’s internal relationship.

When, in the team, we have to submit ourselves to the rules of the system, we play with individual weakness and we convince each other of the advantages of our submission.

When we want to impose our scopes upon the external world, we promote reciprocal empowerment and we convince each other of the advantages to pursue the common aspiration for self dignity.

14.

Imagine a project of audio-visual production for rural areas.

Imagine that a part of the project consists in training eleven young professionals who will be in charge of the audio-visual production.

There is a financial budget provided for the training. This money is given to a school of audio-visual production. The director of the school has to prepare the training programme. What will be his/her considerations?

It all depends on her/his basic approach towards the trainees.

If the primary consideration is to make them able to run the new audio-visual centre in a successful manner, the preoccupation of the training director will be to prepare the trainees for the challenges they will face. In this case the training director will first try to understand the business issues that the new centre will confront; then she/he will look at the strong and weak points of the trainees; and will finally insert the trainees in a course focused to overcome their weak points and make them professionally ready to achieve their objective.

If the primary consideration of the training director is not with the trainees, but, for instance, with benefiting financially, as much as possible, from the training programme, then there will be no effort to analyse either the actual state of preparation of the trainees or the peculiarities of the business environment which awaits them. The best solution for the training director will be to re-adopt training programs which have been already used by the school in different circumstances, so that the resources spent by the school for the execution of the programme are kept at the minimum. The only real job will be to convince the trainees of the utility of undergoing a didactic programme customised for different clients. It will all sound "abstract" to the trainees. But if they are not the ones who pays for the course, they will gulp it.

How is it possible for the trainees to recognise in anticipation the difference in the approach of the director?

They can find out by observing if the director tries to develop in them a critical or a passive attitude. Are they treated as "receivers of a pre-determined instruction" or as "partners of a creative process"?

Such a distinction will help clarify the scenario. In fact, the concept of "persuasion" implies the effort of letting somebody act in a way that is in the interest of the one who is trying to persuade.

The less is this action in the interest of the counterpart, the smarter will the persuader need to be at persuading. The more is the objective to agree on something that is beneficial for both, the less is there the need of "persuading" and the more is the relationship shaped as an open and sincere dialogue between the two counterparts.

15.

"Rhetoric" is the method of communication where the objective is to persuade, i.e. "win over", the counterpart.

The very term "win" implies some sort of competition. And in fact the rhetoric method is always aggressive and is always at the service of our interests. This does not mean that rhetoric always implies hostility. There may surely be hostile rhetoric. And, whenever possible, the best way to persuade the counterpart to comply may be to talk with a gun in your hand.

In the majority of cases, however, a direct show of force will be counterproductive. Better to manifest friendly intentions and win over the counterpart with tools of seduction.

In the seduction techniques, what really counts is the presentation style. Connotation is more important than denotation. We are submerged with different commercial ads, and we all know very well what it means to allure the customer with erotic illusions.

The rhetoric method, while using threats or seduction, always aims at validating its arguments not with the use of logic, but with the excitement fear or allurement.

16.

In the Western civilisation, the fundamental milestone of didactics has been laid by Socrates with the concept of "maieutics".

Maieutics originally was a synonymous of "obstetrics": it means to help to deliver.

Socrates believed that the art of the teacher was not to inculcate in the others one’s ideas, but to awake in the others their own ideas, by helping them in clarifying and expressing themselves. This art therefore is similar to the art practised by his mother, Fenaretes, who was a midwife. In the words of Plato: "As the midwives help women to deliver their children, so Socrates helped men to deliver; with the difference that he was not the obstetrician of their body, but the obstetrician of their pregnant souls" (Teeteto).

The maieutic process is based on dialogue. The teacher "asks" rather than "says"; it is the student who, by answering to the provocative questions of the teacher, gradually develops her/his thoughts and clarifies her/his vision.

This method of dialogue is what it is called "dialectics".

The notion that truth is "generated" through a dialectical process is the most important philosophical contribution of the Western culture to the World civilisation.

The dialectical process is not only instrumental to the objective of leading out pre-existent ideas. In fact, ideas are products of dialectics, which is a creative process.

So, the mind of the students receives the stimulus from the question posed by the teacher, becomes fecund and then gives birth to new conceptions.

The very term of "concept" indicates that mind needs to "conceive"; and this conception is not a process that can take place in a monadic isolation, but results from an creative interaction between different views.

17.

In order to visualise the problem let’s return to the previous example of the two television stations.

(Two new stations are being set up. One is a financed by a multinational company which wants to expand its markets: the objective is to find a way to distribute in that nation the products produced abroad. The other is financed by a co-operative organisation of a local journalist who wants to defend their traditional culture from the negative effects of globalisation.)

Evidently, the business will be much tougher for the free station. Freedom is not easy to obtain. Life will be much easier for the commercial station, which will broadcast standardised models; it will be sufficient that messages are communicated by glamorous young people, that the underlying music is sexy, that the editing rhythm is exciting, that the graphic is attractive. The objective of this station will be only to persuade, to create "audience". And the Sheep will flock!

But the same factor which makes the work easier will be the factor which, in a longer run, will reverse the success story. Because persuading does not generate truth: the communication will gradually become repetitive and boring, in spite of the new fancy containers in which it is presented. Those who work in communication processes and have been asked not to think but to put into attractive garments pre-determined models, cannot suddenly transform themselves into creative teachers. They do not know how to listen to the more authentic requirements of the population to whom they are talking. When the need of the people will change, they will not be able to change.

It is the opposite with the free station. The difficulties of the initial stage, if overcome, will have transformed the workers into truly creative communicators. They will know how to tackle the problems and so will always be able to give new responses to new problems.

At least until their success would prompt an imitation of the pattern which lead to that success, and so a process of standardisation, of redundancy, of bureaucratisation, which will make communication obsolete. And will open the niche for new competitive free stations.

The fact that education is a creative process makes it unappealing for those who would like an easier process. Because education is not only painstaking for the teachers, who would find it easier to repeat the standard notions of accepted manuals and just check if their students have been able to repeat them once again. It is laborious also on the side of the learners. Because people often prefer to be part of the flock, rather than take on the responsibility for what they are.

18.

Standardisation versus creativity. Persuasion versus education. Rhetoric versus dialectics.

We have seen the opposition between these modalities of communication. Every time one communicates, a person has to choose which of the two modalities to adopt. Decision will depend on the objective of communication, on the quality of the human relationship and on the moral stand of the counterparts. But a choice has to be taken; and it will be an exclusive choice: one modality or the other. To adopt both at the same time is contradictory.

In indicating the choices we have not been neutral: we said that education requires dialectical creativity, not rhetoric. However we need now to moderate our partisan stand. Because a social system needs development; but it also needs tradition.

If we look at language itself, we find that linguistic norms are as important as freedom to compose; and semantic redundancy is as significant as figurative speech.

Redundancy and originality oppose each other at the individual level, but they complement each other at the social level. If linguistic forms are not standardised, we could not be creative in the dialogue. New dialectics create new conceptions; but once created, these become the milestones which serve as standard references. In the same way, political activity generates new solutions to new problems but these solutions become the new social standards, which, after some time, are no longer be new, but represent the social norms, until a new political process will substitute them.

So each society is at the same time conservative and progressive. And there could be no progress without some permanency of the entity which is progressing. So whatever is alive, is at the same time preserving its identity and developing its potentiality.

Human communication requires both: standard references and creative expressions.

THE FORMS OF DIDACTICS: DIALECTICS, PROCLAMATION, INSTRUCTION

19

What is the aim cannot be the starting point. If we said that the objective of education is the development of the faculty of the person, it means that these faculties are initially inhibited. Freedom of expression is a point of arrival.

Freedom of expression requires mastering the tools of expression. Expression is art; mastering the tools is a technique. One can be a technician without being an artist; but one can never be an artist without technical proficiency.

On the other hand, the teacher cannot teach creativity in abstraction. Teaching requires a base. There cannot be a didactic process without a discipline which represents the platform on which the personality of the learner gradually gets represented.

That is why disciplines, like techniques, are innumerable. From martial arts to theology, from astronomy to the art of massage … we can make longer or shorter lists of the various codified fields where civilisation has developed different practical competencies. But the basic didactic principle remains always the same.

In the same way that communication requires a technique of expression, the teacher needs to impose discipline upon the students, in order to set the ground for stimulating the development of the creativity.

A mistake which often occurs in modern didactical methods is to start with the opinions of the learners, without due consideration to the fact that there is a hierarchy of knowledge to be considered. So, an excess of delegation of initiative to learners leads to educational failures.

It is the responsibility of the teacher to entrust the learners gradually, as they acquire vision and competence.

---

20.

All societies are stratified into hierarchies. But hierarchical criteria are not the same. Naturally there are some parameters which will function everywhere: money, intelligence, attractiveness, friendliness, etc. But the relationship, for instance, between money and social status is not constant in different cultures in the same way as are those parameters which characterise femininity, elegance, authority, etc.

So while passing from one culture to another, the communication not only changes with respect to the linguistic code adopted. Manners change. Customs change. And they do not just change formally, but also substantially. Because the criteria of stratification changes.

We said before that communication is the affirmation of one’s personality in the social context. But naturally this affirmation has to be done keeping in consideration the parameter of evaluation which are currently present in that system.

This knowledge has nothing to do with the social game itself. It has rather to do with the knowledge of the rules of the game. Once the rules are known, the game may start. Knowledge of the value system of a society is not sufficient to become acceptable, but the interactions will bring some result. Before the knowledge of the codes and the norms, there is no socialisation; and therefore no communication and no personal expression is possible.

21.

In case of free associations, social rules are adopted spontaneously by those who wish to enter in the group.

In the case of the totalitarian societies however, i.e. the system which sets the rules for all people who live there, society needs to proclaim its models and its rules.

So, for instance, the missionary activity is intrinsic to the character of the Catholic Church, which claims to possess a formula valid for all civilisations and assigns to itself a leading role in the universe. This missionary activity is centred on "proclamation", i.e. the announcing of a well defined set of theological views and ethical norms.

But each nation has also to set up a system of the proclamation of its values, like any centre of power that has to proclaim its decrees. These decrees constitute the "rules of the game" within which the subordinates can play their role, in a more or less co-operative or competitive mode.

22.

Part of this work of proclamation of the cultural standards and norms is done through the educational systems. School curricula are exactly that: a presentation of the way society wants to be seen by incoming members, which are the new generations. In this respect the school acts as a sort of official gazette. And the teachers are the announcers of the rules of the game.

How to combine such a role of the official announcer of standard rules and the mission of developing the personality of the learner?

All teachers notify the rules of the game; good teachers also show how to play well.

All teachers present the social norms; good teachers give to their students the capacity to adopt the rules in a creative way.

With good education, the personality develops in a dialectical process, such that the person can express both the aspects of her/his identity: sociability and individuality.

Where education reaches its scope, taking on the responsibility towards one’s community goes hand in hand with the impulse to express one’s original creativity.

---

23.

Know-how is a power factor.

The degree of the power of know-how depends on its social utility and its relative scarcity.

In economic terms, there will always be a negotiation between the individual who offers her/his competence and the context which demands it. But beyond such an economic negotiation, this knowledge becomes, for the person who holds it, the means to assert her/himself in the social environment.

Without individual power, the person has to surrender completely. So, the individual has to capitalise upon her/his power base in order to enter into gratifying social interactions.

The educational process has to consider this process of "empowering" the individual. If it restricts itself only to maieutics, the newly born personality will not survive in the competitive social environment.

Even when a certain social system is not developed enough to orient itself towards the requirements of the individuals and instruction cares only for "social interests", the diffusion, among the individuals, of the "know-how" is still sought for. This is at least for two reasons. The first is that each society is simultaneously in competition with other societies, and so it requires an empowerment of its organisation, which is an effect of the co-ordination of the competencies of the individuals. The second reason is that when important competencies are in the limited possession of a few individuals, the social body will find itself in a subjugated position in front of them.

Therefore, far-sighted communities will always invest in the instruction of its members.

24.

Society has limitations on the individual, but, without society, the individual does not know what to do with her/his freedom. Each personal history is the base of consciousness; and this personal history has to unfold itself in the midst of social dynamics.

This means that there cannot be education without instruction. Education is the process of "leading out" the personality of the individual, and this can not happen in isolation.

Therefore instruction, which is the acquisition of the tools required for social interactions, is necessarily a part of every educational process.

25.

As a consequence of what we said before, it is now clear that in the case of "proclamation" and "instruction" the process of communication consists merely in the "handing over" of pre-conceived notions.

In a mono-directional communication, statements and rules are "packed" in a transmittable form and delivered on the other side. What the communicator has to say is already established in advance: there is nothing to change as a result of the lively interaction. Except for a verification of the expected process of "understanding". Like, for instance, when there is an "objective" test, through which the teacher controls how much the students have been able to retain from what has been said. From the results of the test the teacher will be able to choose whether to proceed further, or repeat the lesson, etc. But in any case, teaching will just be a process of "repeating" what has been established in the program.

We said, earlier, that a real process of communication is always circular, i.e. the transmitter is at the same time a receiver and the receiver is at the same time a transmitter. Now we are saying that mere proclamation and mere instruction do not require a real dialogue, because they are just a repetition of standard notions. It follows that mere instruction is not really a process of communication, but merely a process of information.

Naturally those who receive the instruction, and who are just passive in this process, will react, and will therefore, now or later, become active subjects. This however will take place outside the process of instruction, which considers only the transmission of standard information and therefore it isolates the phase of the transmission of norms from the overall dynamics of the communication of knowledge.

26.

Training is a process by which a know-how is imparted. Generally, training has the scope of teaching how to operate a certain kind of equipment or how to manage a certain production method. In any case, the objective of training is to improve the economic performance.

The difference between training and instruction is that while the latter is oriented towards increasing the capacity of the individual, the former is oriented towards improving the performance of the organisation that is exploiting the productive capacity of the individual.

Naturally the two things are correlated. Of course, the majority of us lives by selling our labour; and this is nothing else but allowing an organisation to exploit us. The larger the number of us to be exploited, the better are our chances of survival. So training is not something which goes "against" the persons for the simple reason that it is not oriented to their interests but it is oriented to the interest of the organisation.

The difference of emphasis however is not marginal and it manifests a different approach to the process of transmission of know-how which has much wider implications.

27.

Do machines work for the sake of men? Or do men work for the sake of machines?

Put this way, the answer is easy. Still, machines require men to function. And with the advancement of technological progress, human labour has increasingly become in service of the functioning of machines.

The same question, the same answer, and the same problem, occurs when we substitute the term "machine" with the term "organisation": do organisations function for the sake of men? Or do men work for the sake of organisations?

EDUCATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:

Planning a sustainable cultural intervention

28.

Economy is based on the exploitation of natural and human resources. Economy can develop if resources are better exploited: more extensively and with less wastage.

In any case, humanity has to face the hard fact that resources are scarce. There are resources that are not possible to regenerate, like the fossil fuel. In the case of the majority of resources, regeneration is possible, provided the pace of exploitation does not exceed the pace of regeneration.

When there is a balance between exploitation and regeneration, we say that the economic system is "sustained". Sustainable development takes place when economic growth does not jeopardise the regeneration of resources.

So, for instance, fishing is sustainable if the catch does not exceed the level required for biological balance. Over-fishing may create a sudden growth of income, but it is not a form of sustainable development. After the initial growth, there will be a fall to levels much below the initial one.

Also human resources need to be regenerated. In West European countries the fall of birth rate is already affecting the economic system, especially with regard to the public system of social security pensions, health, etc. On a global scale however, the problem of sustainable growth hasn’t to do with overpopulation. But the real question is that an individual does not constitute an economic resource unless she/he is qualified. There are of course different sorts of qualifications and competencies, but they all require a period of education, instruction and training.

This means that every economic system has to reinvest, in the regeneration of the human resources, a part of the profits of economic activity. Without such an investment, the economy is not sustained. Such an investment is borne by different social institutions. Families everywhere always bear the maximum burden, both in terms of financial costs as well as in terms of time and fatigue spent. But the more the system is developed, the bigger is the investment required for qualifying human resources. Community, State, companies, etc., must take part in this global investment which is strategic for economic vitality. In fact, education and training nowadays represents the most powerful source of competitive advantage among nations.

29.

The professional competency of a person does not only depend on how much she/he knows. It also depends upon the way she/he interacts with the others.

An efficacious education does not only qualify the competence of the individual; it also makes the individual more capable of entering into constructive relationships with the others. Without education, social relationships tend to be nastier, and this reciprocal hostility erodes the sense of solidarity in the community and therefore undermines its organisational structure.

We can speak of sustainable development also from the social and cultural point of view. In fact, economic growth requires an elaborated political organisation, which itself is the result of cultural development. Economy exploits this cultural organisation for its own legitimate purpose.

Economy is the resource for the cultural system; in the same way that culture is the resource of the economic system. But if we do not reinvest in the regeneration of culture an adequate portion of the profits of economic activity, culture decays; and the whole system rots.

Without cultural regeneration, social decadence is unavoidable, because the economic game is won in a competitive set up and financial interactions have to be played as a power game. If we want the game to remain fare and constructive, we need an authority which sets and enforces the rules of the game; an authority which is not subdued to any particular group of players. These are the political foundations of the economic system, which prosper when politics remains anchored in a solid cultural milieu. When the rules of the game are settled by the winners of the game itself, the system loses its fairness, and starts decaying.

30.

The regeneration of resources (natural, human and social resources) is centred around "education".

This is all the more true if we do not limit the purview of education to mere instruction of the new generation, but we include into education, as it is correct to do so, all efforts aimed at developing human beings; and so we include in it, literature and other forms of artistic production, community service, and all the other manifestations of aesthetic and ethical dimensions of the human being.

Also in the regeneration of natural resources, education is the key factor. In fact, it is only through a developed aesthetic and ethical sensibility that we can limit our appetite for nature’s resources. And what is education if not the development of such a refined sensitivity!

Therefore, it becomes clear that what is spent in education represents a remunerative investment; and that the profits of this investment will be enjoyed not only by those who are educated, but also by the whole community.

31.

We have already spoken about this dichotomy, according to which the social structure is at the same time a means and a goal, according to the cultural perspective.

At this point, it is useful to highlight the consequences of a combination of two facts, which we have seen before:

• that an educated person is a resource for the system;
• that power depends on the control of a scarce resource.

The consequence is that the person is precious to the system, the more she/he posses a specific know how which is in short supply. So the more knowledge is distributed, the less is the power, upon the others, of those who hold the knowledge. But at the same time, the more knowledge is distributed, the better is the condition of those who demand that particular competency since they will have to pay less for it.

These contrasts of interests function as a bipolar field within which financial value is attributed to knowledge; and this allows a strategy of financial investments on the accumulation of knowledge, both at the individual and the social level.

On the other hand, we must note that while there are competencies that society does not need in excess, (like in the case of medicine: there is no advantage to have too many doctors), on the other hand, there are other aspects of knowledge which acquire added value due to the fact that they are abundant and shared by the whole community. This is the case with ethical and aesthetic education: since sensitivity thus develops in all members of the community, the level of the culture is raised and different sorts of social interactions become possible; as were not feasible with rougher perspectives. (We all know how preferable it is to occupy a lower position in a refined context than a high position in a vulgar one.)

As society develops towards cultural refinement, so the pattern of socialisation becomes more human, and society itself tends to become more a means and less an objective for the persons who are its members. This fact also reduces the competitive features of possessing specialised knowledge and increases the sense of solidarity in the community.

This "added value" of shared knowledge represents the balancing factor with respect to the opposite interest of preserving the knowledge in the small circles in order to maintain the balance of power in few hands. So, by the constant existence of a polarity of interests, the system can at the same time change and maintain an internal balance.

32.

We have seen before that communication requires, at the same time, a system of fixed rules and a margin of open creativity. And this is not only true in the case of individual expressions which generate any form of composition and are expressed in any form of media. This balance between norms and freedom is also the generative factor of the historical process.

It is the same with the political process, where each new law is a new expression of the social will and is therefore an expression of freedom. At the same time, each new law becomes a standard for the successive activities, and therefore a limitation of freedom in certain patterns.

So in the case of education: it is at the same time a means and a scope. The exigency of integrating individuals in the social structure and the exigency of making the social structure functional to the individual are complementary; and in fact they reciprocally sustain each other.

Just as non-economic resources sustain economic activity. And the economic activity sustains the regeneration of the non-economic aspects of social life.

33.

The fact that there are opposite interests which serve to balance the system does not imply that societies are always balanced.

There are cases in which culture loses sight of the importance of value education. All teaching becomes standardised in centralised plans, designed with the scope of serving the economic system. So vocational training is given priority with respect to the creation of refined sensitivity.

Professional training may be organised and given in advanced research centres and Universities but this does not change the hard fact that training will never make as its objective, the personality of the student.

The consequence of the lack of the formation of critical minds will be the loss of the sense of solidarity in the community and the loss of elasticity in the social structure.

Specialised professionals, who have just received technical instructions, are much more rigid to change. So when the economic conditions change, a highly technical society may find itself unable to adapt itself with sufficient elasticity. Because change requires creativity and creativity requires an overall human development which includes a nurturing of aesthetic sensitivity.

On the other hand, nothing is as meaningless as a system of instruction which claims to be all "value-oriented", which actually does not provide the students with the technical means to express their personality. In such cases, all teaching becomes abstract, theoretical, rhetorical, deprived of connection with the real world where economy thrives and upon which the concrete future of the students depends.

34.

At this point, it should be clear that not only is development the aim of education; but also education is the aim of development. And that education generates new forms of development just as development generates new forms of education.

The real contemporary challenge is to re-tune the responsibilities of investing into education now that we have entered a global economic system. While financial markets are integrating, education cannot remain a parochial affair.

The globalisation of the economy and the consequent acceleration of financial growth has increased world-wide the exploitation of the resources, be these natural or human resources. If we aim at making this economic integration "sustainable", we need to reinvest some of the profits of globalisation into the regeneration of human and natural resources. And therefore, we need a global approach to education and training.

We can now avail of technologies capable of addressing a world-wide audience. We need to generate a sense of global responsibility and a capacity to talk in a planetary context.

This manual wants to be a contribution towards such an aim.