IdeaGIANT.org

Abstract
Foundation Theory is a tested belief that all complex structures are derived from a Simple foundation. In a Human Systems this Simple foundation is the Ethical catalyst that enables for any Reality to be constructed. When a System(s) is aligned with its Foundation it allows for all the subsequent ‘creations’ to be Meaningful in that it manifests the Foundation into an iteration of them in dynamic ways. This, in practice, has worked with the hardest to serve youth; learning disable, adjudicated, homeless, parenting, those in poverty, high school drop-outs, etc.

 Belief Structure
Foundation theory places the individual as the creator of Reality. It is rooted in basic philosophical and neurological inquiries. Most easily stated it is the belief that the Individual is themselves a synthesis of unique experiences (conscious, unconscious), innate (unique) biological realities e.g. senses etc. This individual then makes contact with the External world through this Synthesis that reveals a ‘Reality’ to them. We believe that this is the Ethical Reality. And this Reality is Unique to them: their Individuality determines their Universal Worth e.g. any system exists only because of its variables within that system and if a variable of that system is removed that System is no longer extant. It is an entirely new ‘System’. Thus the individual is a Universal Principle both individually and as an entirety simultaneously.

 Everything that we do, say, and create is subsequently projections of this underlying Ethic and it reverberates throughout an entire system via cause and effect, therefore all that we do, say, create is Meaningful on a Universal scale. The world becomes, through this lens, a reflection not of non-partisan ‘realities’ but of a distinct partisan (even if willfully ignorant of this fact) value system. And that Human is the direct arbiter of it on an individual level. On an individual level, in a present moment, as well as a future reality what we do is Meaningful.

 The understanding of my Universal Worth is Dignity; the Understanding of the Other’s Universal Worth is Humility. The understanding of my power and meaning arises purpose and duty to this understanding.

 This is Reality. With Awareness derived from an honest and engaged inquiry into the underlying motives and catalyst to our existence we reveal our innate goodness. It reveals the ability for Human to mold their reality via their mastery of their own Belief structure that builds their Ethical Foundation (lens of Reality). With this understanding arises Responsibility. With our Awareness we move toward Meaning that uses the understanding of our individual goodness to find our purpose, our duty.

 Who Learning Center North Serves 

Learning Center North (LCN) is a program that was created to support the most underserved populations of youth from 16-21. On a measurable level it serves them in a threefold manner: Basic/Developmental Skills education, Employment, and Barrier removals toward achieving an Education and Employment via intensive case management. Its goal is to move students on to Community College for at least a year which has shown to be the tipping point between being self-sustainable and not.
In the most recent survey of demographics it was found that the average age was 17.5 and that 60% of these children were Justice Involved, 76% from Low Income, 50% suffering from Drug or Alcohol abuse, 99.4% Educationally At-Risk, 13% actively using Public Assistance (many qualify but do not access it), 13% Parenting, 10% identify as homeless (but 32.4% are living in Non-Parental Care which a bulk is what we call Couch Surfing)-100% of the children are High School Drop-Outs.

I must add here that these numbers are a snapshot and a few of these categories fluctuate quite dramatically. Our Drug and Alcohol abuse %’s shown here are mid-range for norm, self-identifying Homeless children has been 40% at times, and we have had much higher Parenting numbers as well. The Educationally At-Risk numbers stay constant as does those that actively use Public Assistance. However, we must also note that this is a snapshot of Averages and at times we have had classrooms filled with one or other of the groups or none at all. On a teacher scale this snapshot does not reflect the Actuality of the daily interaction with the youth which at Learning Center North is one of constant flux.

 Before entering our program the average number of credits a student has is 7.5 credits, with a 28% pass rate on their WASL reading/writing, and a 50% pass rate on the credits they took in high school.

 41.7% of the students felt that what they learned in High School was Meaningful and would help them later in life, 36.2% felt that they could succeed in the Future, 19.6% felt that they would be able to succeed in School.

After our program 97.9% of students felt that what they learned at LCN was meaningful, 93.8% felt that they could succeed in the future, 89.6% felt that they could succeed in school.

 70% of our students enrolled/year go onto college, virtually all that finish with LCN (GED/High School Diploma) move on to college (the numbers are a 100% at the current reading but I do not feel comfortable putting that number in because some of our students take longer than a year to get their GED/High School Diploma). The following is a small list of the schools and programs our students enroll into: University of Washington, Western Washington University, George Washington University (applying to Harvard University’s Kennedy School), Oregon University, completion of Vocational programs ranging from Culinary Arts to Criminal Justice from a nationally recognized automotive program to Early Childhood Education.

 But most importantly-our students find they are worthy, that they have ultimate worth, and that breeds in them a confidence to know their meaning, it reveals their duty/purpose. Our students are beautiful, wonderful Universal entities inherently, what separates them from engaging this Reality is (or was) we posit at LCN, their lack of awareness of this universality and their Meaning. We at LCN are a school on paper that is engaging the issues of barriers to an education, acquiring an education, and garnering skills to support themselves in a material way. We, on paper are engaging a Crisis in Education. But at the living heart of LCN we are engaging a Crisis of Meaning that permeates the society at large with a focus on our particular students.

When we address this Crisis of Meaning the rest of the Material outputs naturally arise. I cannot put enough emphasis on this point: our program’s measurable outcomes are NOT the goals of our program. What Foundation Theory has revealed is that when you focus on the catalysts for action, have the bravery to follow where they lead you both in program development and student engagement, the measurable goals are attained and, most often, exceeded. We have observed the converse is true as well, that if you focus primarily on the measurable goals the program becomes less effective and swamped in systematic bureaucracy.

 We observed our success and were able to come to the conclusion that when an individual knows their duty they find that the accomplishing of material tasks becomes a part of their overall Meaningful purpose. This is instead of Accomplishments that are pseudo self sustaining e.g. getting a degree for a degrees sake, getting a job for a jobs sake, or Materially rooted e.g. a degree to get a job, a job to make money, money to consume but are rooted in Transcendent Meaning e.g. my purpose Transcends my Self and engages the overall Environment.

 Using Foundation Theory as an Education Model

 LCN’s education model was constructed off of Foundation Theory. It was the gathering of the stake holders to determine what their various Ethical Realities were and determined how an Education System could come from a communal Ethical Foundation. This communal Ethical Foundation was not a compromise between individuals/groups but was a 100% buy in using their own individual Ethical Foundations as a means to do so.

We define Community as where the Individual engages with the environment and therefore must use their skills, ability, and personality to make wise judgments.

Judgment is defined as a Humility driven understanding of everything worth but a decision still must be made with full understanding it is a necessary step to be made if we are to enact a System but does not diminish the overall Worth of the individual. It also follows along the insight that Hannah Arendt pointed out during the Eichmann trials of a good judge who see the object of his judgment as a possibility of themselves if the variables of life were laid out differently. And yet they still judge.

“Without the grace of God therefore I go” is the quote she used.  

 The belief structure that Foundation Theory espouses of Universality was accepted as a beginning, that of Human’s innate goodness, and that there was duty to be upheld in that realization which was expressly, in this system, determined to be to create a dynamic structure where Underserved Youth could (can) garner an education.

We defined Education: as an Individual gaining the skills in order to reveal meaning in their lives

From this base we were able to construct the next level of belief: Holistic teaching, Whole Student understanding.

Holistic teaching is the understanding that an education is acquired (and to be taught) through the cultivation of the Mind on three levels: Mental, Spiritual, and Physical.

 Whole Student Understanding: Whole student understanding is the removal of an incomplete view of youth. Young people are not under-formed adults but Whole Youth which has an entire spectrum of ‘success’ open to them. This understanding allows for us to give respect and actively engage our Skill sets in their present moment which is where the Learning process resides. It becomes meaningful not in some distant future but right now. This does not detract from the idea of future tense either, focusing on the naked present gives real meaning to inquiries into the future, a base for such thoughts, ideas, and movement can reside upon. Part of being a Youth is thinking and planning about the future but it is not the entirety of being a youth as much of our culture believes it to be so.

The Student
We start from the belief that all Humans want to be educated, that they have an innate thirst to know, as well as have skills to be able to know well and honorably. That if it seems that there is a lack of wanting to be educated that it is because of a hurt/barrier/lack within them and it is our duty, if possible, to address it with them.

Curriculum and Testing

 Before we move on we should explain Individual Student Engagement Because of the wide skill disparity in our program each student became a ‘classroom’ unto themselves. CASAS testing determined beginning skill sets for the students and then they are assigned and Individual Action Plan that they start from in three overall Skill areas: Reading, Mathematics, and Writing. The bulk of our students will be focused on passing the GED which is made up of 5 different content areas; Social Studies (SS), Science, Reading, Writing, and Math. However, SS, Science, and Reading are all reading comprehension skill sets and can be lumped under a Reading Skill set by itself. Thus the focus of the Program from an academic standpoint is to increase these Three Root skills: Reading, Writing, and Mathematics.

 Curriculum is what a great deal of Education Models focus on. In a Foundation Theory model this is the Tool level Definitive level e.g. the determining factor of what type of program we are. It is the tools that we use to engage our students in the action of becoming educated. They do their duty on all levels of the Holistic student by being rooted in the Foundations of the program. However, that does not mean that they cannot be dynamic, creative, or traditional.

At this level with the Foundation set, the curriculum becomes free to the Teacher to be able to do what ‘works’. The Curriculum is not the foundation and thus a particular curriculum is not able to define that particular education models identity e.g. because it is project based learning does not necessarily mean that it is good, or bad, or neutral.

The teacher does what works.

At LCN there is a hodge-podge of curriculums that actively engage the students; project based learning based on Environmental models, as well as traditional models such as worksheets, etc. I will focus on the Traditional methods as a bulk of what we have proposed is Non-Traditional.

Most of our student have reacted best, and achieved understanding, of Math by doing worksheets. It was rooted in the conversations I have had with Engineers who have told me that the only way to become knowledgeable and adept at mathematics is to do, “lots of problems”. This inquiry was because the bulk of our students struggled with basic mathematics and we wanted to find a way that worked: worksheets worked when coupled with the proper Foundations, access to teachers, and a time frame that was Skill determined not temporally determined e.g. the student would (GED) test when they had the skills not when the test had to be administered.

We also test (quiz) often and regularly, which is different than many Non-Traditional schools. The difference being that the meaning of the test is to determine progress or lack of progress academically and to redress, if necessary, the individual plan made for the student and see what is working and not working. It is not punitive.

 The Teachers are actively encouraged to make real relationships with the students because one of the ‘beliefs’ our Foundations point to (and history) is that learning is an intimate experience. It is also very effective with our population because it is this lack of intimate and respectful contact that our students have had from adults. This created an environment that they did not feel safe to embark on new pathways. However, I must add, we do not encourage friendship per se, nor a parent-child relationship, but a Real and emotionally engaged Student/Teacher relationship based upon respect and love for the Child. This engagement enables the teachers to know on a deeper level what are the causes of the lack of academic success and address it.

Our students, according to CASAS definition, are increasing at about a grade skill a month.

Final Notes
Foundation Theory is a model that is purposely Simple because it believes that complexity (systems level) creations are derived from Simplicity. Simplicity is not to be misunderstood as easy as any Value Driven model takes incredible bravery, strength, and dedication to enact. It takes teeth as well. There must be 100% buy in the Foundations e.g. “This is not what we believe no matter what seeming benefit arises from it. We will not do it.” Or, conversely, “No matter the consequences we will do it”. Also, if a 100% buy in is not met that stake holder (staff) must be removed from the overall attempt. Even if it seems too simple at first glance we must remember,

It works.

It works on all levels of the Holistic Model, our student feel empowered as Human Beings, they have either found Meaning or the pathway toward Meaning, they know their duty, they make measurable advances in skill sets and outlook in their lives, they garner skills to be able to take care of themselves (and loved ones) materially.

Foundation Theory is not a theory of Non-Traditional methodologies for the sake of being Non-Traditional. It is the work of a decade and a half of observation and implementation of what works. It is the only model that we have been able to see that works consistently and across personalities, beyond the particulars to the individuals within the system, and without bias toward any particular system (as long as it was 100% value driven).

We believe that Foundation Theory is a successful model in the Education field but transcends the particular system and can be implemented in any Organizational System.

Guru Dorje

I am for National Health Care. I am for single payer health care. I say this though without the seemingly carefree vehemence that most of the adherents feel for it. You see, I must say, there is a thing about me that nags at me at all times, it is my inability to relinquish my observational/analytical nature. This leads to a great deal of being a laggard in the festivities but, conversely, being consistently pestered for my input on a wide range of subjects. Perhaps I am a fuddy-duddy which lacks the pre-requisite to be the ‘norm’ in glib in, strangely, a culture exhibiting obvious symptoms of senility despite its Youth lust. What this means in regards for National Health care is this: when one posits a system, any system, we cannot posit its outputs (if they are human) through a mechanized lens. For better or ill Man is Organic and the basis of Man is the individual which ducks and dodges, much to the chagrin of Scientists, the drive to ‘Average’ them. A system cannot be engendered outside of the workings of Man. In the case of National Health Care as a system it cannot be posited outside of the Cultural loci of where it has arisen. Therefore to think that a Scandinavian or Canadian system would work in America is not taking into account the radically, in many areas, different foundations of how we view Reality.

Many people believe that America is the wealthiest country in the world. It is not. It is one of the wealthiest in the world but it is not the wealthiest (in many regards). In fact, many of the most wealthy nations (and happiest according to some studies like the OECD findings-which, America did not crack the top 10) are in Scandinavian countries. I have heard numerous pundits point to these findings as being ‘reasoning’ for taking on similar systems e.g. National Health care breeds happiness. It is in this belief structure that the inherent error arises: the system does not breed happiness (perhaps it multiplies it once it is in place but it is not the catalyst to it). It is an underlying value foundation that does this and when we think it comes from a Policy system we become disappointed with its results. This value system is individual driven and interacts with a society at large (community/cultural). This is what the Evolutionary Biologist would call a ‘fit’ when they are talking about an individual within a species with its genetic code interacting with the external environment.

The ‘fit’ in America is based upon a desirous mentality, a deep-seated consumptive ideology. This ideology, I posit, is different than the roots of Scandinavian countries which can be shown explicitly in a quote from a Politician from that area when asked why they have year long (or longer) paid maternity leave, “the business of government is to produce good citizens. This produces good citizens.” A consumptive mentality makes an individual’s ‘meaning’ to be determined by measures of consumption e.g. money. If this is the case then anything that does not have these markers is, at best, difficult to be able to determine Meaning in the individual’s existence. Death, for example, becomes an ultimate End in the Materialist culture because, in such a mentality, it becomes the End of meaning e.g. one cannot continue consuming (in any material measure). A meaningless life is more alarming than the end of life, however, in America we have made life only about consuming and thus death and its terrors is inextricably linked with the additional terror of the loss of meaning.

From this point I see that the problems of National Health care will arise. We will force our system to be one of our culture that sees death not as a part of life, but as an external ‘disease’ that has to be fought tooth and nail to be conquered. It is the infidel we are trying to convert. With this cultural paradigm we will not be able to separate effective practices from that which are most ‘technological’ in practice. For example, an average Minnesotan on Medicare sees two specialists when they are diagnosed with inoperable, terminal, brain cancer. The very same patient in New York, or Miami, or some other large urban center sees 20 specialists. The patients seeing 18 more specialists do not have any appreciable difference in length of life after diagnoses or with quality of life after diagnoses, but their effect on the Medicare system are demonstrably different. This is the difference between effective practices and most ‘technological’ practices.

This, in practice, I have seen many agree with. They say they understand this. But it is the person that is the final throws of Cancer with it riddled through their body and hears that a ‘panel’ has decided that they cannot allocate resources to ‘unproven’ technologies for their care that must understand it. The patient must have the wherewithal and their families and advocates to believe that this may be the case; that Death is, for all intensive purposes, inevitable in this case and that Hospice and decisions made in this direction are the best route. But I don’t think the average American would accept this, I am not sure if I would, but I have seen it accepted elsewhere. We need ‘hope’ and this hope, in this case, even if it is not actually hope but a deep sense of ignorance, is not feasible under a health care system that has finite resources.

We like to say we are, “rational beings” it is a common mantra I have heard and hear it amongst my colleagues and leaders. But this rationality is a whimsical thing in us and is something I call a fair-weather rationality. That it arises only when there is not a competing self-interest in not being so. In a managed National Health Care system the key is on the Management aspects which demands a populace that can think Rationally even when their self-interest (in this case the drive to ‘conquer’ death) is to do the opposite. America is not ‘rational’ in this sense and thinks we can both have access to the Most Technological as well as being cost-effective. This is not the case. It is not the case anywhere in the world that has these systems.

It is our right to Irrationality that we must be able to give up. It is to be sober thinkers and individuals with Meaning that transcends consumption, the material that is necessary for us to be able to live happily with National Health care. It is here, at this individual lens of Reality that the work must be done. Perhaps it can be done incrementally as we are trying to do with the current health care reform. I do know though that without it being done National Health Care cannot be successful. It will not be able to bring ‘happiness’ without this fundamental change preceding it.

I have taught young people closing in just over a decade plus five years. I have taught from 3 grade on. What I have witnessed is the awesome nature of the Mind and all that it is capable of, as well as the Systems that are in place, currently, that are used to control this-what the Dalai Lama calls, “a limitless Mind”.

If we place systems that are fragmented without an understanding of the subtle continuance of the Mind, we lead individuals and ourselves, into seeing Reality as static moments instead of dynamic one(s). Let me give you an example of grades. Grades were not always ‘here’ and, in fact, would have been a confusing to our Founding Fathers. Grades started in the early 19th century by Yale University and gained popularity as the Industrial Revolution took hold.

When we think of grades from a standpoint of learning it seems bizarre despite its ubiquity. When I get a C grade on an essay it is just a snapshot of my understanding at that moment. If we used this in the Real learning environment we would see it does not coincide with our learning process. For example, I do not know how to change the oil in my car, at this moment, I would have an F. If I proceeded to try to learn it would, if we gave incremental snapshots, slowly increase until I was proficient, let us say a C-then if I proceeded underneath the tutelage of a teacher or book, I would progress upwards-to a B, then to an A.  This is Reality, it is the way both our Minds learn and the way that has been reflected in our World both natural and created.

A child from infancy onwards is slowly becoming familiar with their environment, progressing up their levels of proficiency from walking, to language, etc. All this way is fraught with ‘failures’ which are not ‘failures’ nor are they C’s or B’s, ultimately, they are just moments in their learning process. The danger of taking these ‘moments’ and giving them some sort of Ultimate meaning by placing such crushing ‘meaning’ behind them is that we are preparing Youth to be the Opposite of an organic Learner and more as Mechanistic creations.

I see it with infants, my child, they are naturally dedicated and believe in the process of learning. They fall down, they cry, get up and try again, they suffer each word, repeat it, try again, point, grunt, learn the word, and progress in proficiency. We do not follow this Natural manner of learning and, in fact, break this Natural desire by imputed systematic means e.g. grades which is backed by emotional warfare via shame. Babies have no Shame in their learning, but somehow, along the way, we all get ashamed at not knowing, even that which is impossible for us to have known (I have taught Math classes in College Algebra and the students will not ask questions or ask for help and inevitably fall horribly behind and then have a self-reifying negative feedback loop causing them to see themselves as ‘dumb’: which is a stultified state where we forego our Natural instinct toward Education)

There are multiple layers of dangers that this sort of Educational systems has and will cause. It causes us to become ashamed of our Natural processes of learning, of repetition, of enacting it in our lives (or not. One is always, as a teacher, asked, “why do I have to learn calculus” and from a standpoint of ‘use’ in the mechanized sense ‘you do not’ but in an organic sense we see it as a illustration of the learning process which, ultimately, is what an Education is: the skills to find meaning in one’s life (what we have focused exclusively is on the Skill side but without Meaning skills become fruitless.) With this Self imposed stultification due to shame we are losing large swaths of our Youth to this, and, subsequently enormous talent and ability.

Another of the dangers that, to me, is the greatest danger is the Fragmenting of our psyches via what should be the process of teaching us the Underlying universality. When we fragment our minds we see ourselves as removed from Other fragments e.g. C’s from B’s, which, ultimately renders us into a secondary position and an impotent one. We see our children, and I have seen this, jokingly say, “I can’t do this. I am dumb,” but their actions constitute a ready belief in this. I have never seen in my 15 years a child too dumb to attain the Material manifestations of an education e.g. degrees. I have seen many that couldn’t do it in a set amount of time, but given a length of time that is adequate for their processes they could excel. However, despite in our Modern age of NEEDING this skill based education they do not achieve it, despite them knowng they need it for any semblance of a decent life.  Our fragmentation makes us lose the belief that it is within our power to be able to change our Realities. We CAN change our realities because it is based upon our interaction with the Environment-this interface is done via senses and we interpret the data the senses pass on. This interpretation is our own. Reality is our own.

When we see our Lives as separate from each other, when our Meanings are external, we become secondary. We become, at best, a cog, then we integrate into the Materialist leanings of our Ed. system e.g. science etc. This lens of viewing the world tells us about planets, it tells us about the yawning space to the edge of the universe, and if taken explicitly as a means to Meaning it tells us that we are insignificant. We are, ultimately, in such a world a useless cog in the backwater of a relatively insignificant Galaxy that is one of many. The material inquiry is a means to understand the working parts of our Material existence but is not a means to Meaning.

Grades are not, by themselves, Bad-but what it represents as a means of Reality is. It tells us that our ‘moment’ in our learning is our learning, it tells us that this moments is separate from other moments, and is a reflection of a fractured psyche; one that tells us that we are ultimately just our parts and that ultimately, our parts, no matter how small we go-are insignificant in the individual, and quite possibly insignificant as a whole if we are talking about species wide, or even earth wide. It is what the grade illustrates that alarms me.

HOW DO WE CHANGE?

I hesitate to give the ‘answer’ but many have questioned those that expose without an effort at trying to elevate. Here is my attempt at doing it in regards to grades.

Grades, by themselves, are not bad and if we use them with the understanding that it is a process of learning and knowing that the end goal being that all the students reach A’s as a goal. This would take us to using grades such as kindergarten and 1^st grade, etc, to cease being an age attainment but a skill attainment.

Many people who know me would be shocked at my suggestion here because they think that believing as I do makes it so that I cannot have more ‘traditional’ methodologies. This is untrue. I believe that we should have more testing and not less. That the testing should be the pre-requisite to attaining the next grade and should be explicit at the beginning of the grade to both child and guardian what skills will have to be mastered to attain the next level. This allows for grades to be fluid-for example, if I read at a 6^th grade level but do math at a 4^th grade level, then this study is open to me. I test out of each ‘grade’ with persistent quizzes, maybe weekly, to document progress. This can be also in the Non-Academic skill sets, which, in my recent career has seen a dire need of e.g. social skills. When these grading rubrics are open and clear to our guardians and children we can see them grow at their own pace. I have seen, in my school, children increase their skill sets a grade over a month and a half. They studied 8 hrs a day on a particular skill set and advanced.

If we use age as the determining factor of grade level then we take away the biological fact that brains develop differently and at different paces as much as our bodies do. By making it Skill based attainment we allow for this level of maturity to grow in our students. In my experience even with students that are ‘behind’ when the maturity strikes them, if they have the means to enact this maturity academically, they do, and at almost alarming rates. I have seen a child go from a 3-4^th grade math skill set to a 12^th grade math skill set in a year.

Many fear this sort of methodology would rid us of the ‘softer’ learning. I disagree .I would not get rid of PE or Literature, nor the drive to educate our children in Sex Ed, nor social skills, nor the classics which I think the bulk of our learning should be in anyways for we live in the Modern world currently. I adhere to the idea that it is not a choice of Either Or, but of AND, and we can create schools that allow our children to progress through their learning at their pace-at attaining excellence (all final test grades, quizzes, must be 90% plus for example). This would be with strong teacher influence in the testing formats, with co-teacher ‘editing’ of these tests, and how these children learn these skills will be up to the teacher’s talent and ability. I also believe this curriculum should go through the sieve of parents and students. I have rarely, if ever, seen parents and students empowered to know, own, and give input to their education, they have been for too long given a passive role. This empowerment could be allowing administrators, students, and parents, (co) teachers an ability veto aspects of the skills to be met and the means-but it would have to be a 75% or more vote (I also think this is a fabulous way to instill ‘merit’ based raises).

I hope this is illuminating and was of some use.

Guru