Marko Koskinen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Mon, 05 Mar 2001 20:46:58 -0500
I think some examples are in order. I take some real-life situations
from SVS as examples and see how they would be delt with in the system I
Problem 1. X throws a snowball at Y after Y had asked him not to.
Solution: Y goes to a PS and tells the story. PS then seeks X out and
asks him if he feels he considers this incident something that he
shouldn't have done. If X says he shouldn't have done it then the PS
askes what X would like to do to fix the problem. X might come up with a
solution that satisfies Y and the problem would be solved. If X couldn't
come up with a satisfying solution, Y could bring the issue up again and
X would be given another chance and probably the PS could ask wheter X
would like to have some help in figuring out a better solution. If X
would want help he could ask the PS or another PS to help him or he
could ask Y to discuss with him about the issue in which case Y could
ask PS to join them as a mediator/chair.
If X didn't think he had done anything wrong, then the PS would gather
both X and Y and let them decide wheter they would want some PS to be a
mediator or not and if either one wanted to have a mediator, then they
would have one, which would be chosen by the one willing to have one. If
both wanted to have different mediators, they could both have one. And
the negotiation would go on until it would be solved.
The role of PS:s would be to see that each member involved in the
problem, would be equally allowed to talk.
Problem 2: Z didn't do the trash on her day.
Solution: G finds this out and tells it to the PS, who then seeks Z out
and asks if she thought she should've done this. If Z thought she
should've then the PS asks what would she do to fix the problem. If the
solution proposed satisfies G then the problem would be over. See above
what would happen in other cases.
Problem 3: C, H and T were roughhousing and this upset L.
Solution: L would tell this to a PS who then would seek C, H and T out
and ask them if what they'd done was something they shouldn't have done.
Let's suppose they didn't think they did anything wrong. Then the PS
would get all four (including L) together and all four could decide
wheter they would want a PS in their problem solving group or not. If
they did, all requested PSs would come. And once again, the discussion
would go on until mutual agreement would be reached.
I went throgh a number of actual JC cases and didn't find any that
couldn't be handled this way.
This kind of system would make many rules unnecessary and reduce
unnecessary bureaucracy. As John stated the PSs would probably need some
knowledge about problem solving, group processes and emotions.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:16:53 EST