permaculture

["Michael Kramer" <MKramer@hawaii.rr.com>]

Since I am not surprised at all by the reaction I'm getting to suggestions
for change, I'm going to take this conversation to another level. All
natural systems evolve, and the way they do this is through succession,
waste recycling, resource accumulation, etc. These concepts can be pointed
out without needing to spend hours on the water cycle or the functions of
trees. Energy exchange and addressing entropy can be covered using countless
examples in the invisible structures realm, all while basing the analysis on
the way nature works. What's really interesting is that other movements have
found a way to do this while we are left in the dust, and they are having a
serious impact. The Ecopsychology, Ecological Design, Natural Capitalism,
and Natural Steps folks came well after us and have managed to really get
their message out there in a great way, tackle significant projects, and
generate credibility. We have not.

So the Basic Permaculture Design Course should evolve, for despite its good
qualities, it is obsolete. It's too focused on how nature works and not on
applications of the principles of natural systems. The designs students
typically create are primitive and reflect only rudimentary understanding of
the relationships between elements in a system, and this is because most of
the course is spent lecturing in one ear and out the other on techniques in
one dimension rather than on the qualities of superior relationships. Let me
be moe clear about this. Many (could one say most?) permaculture
certification course graduates DO NOT UNDERSTAND PERMACULTURE DESIGN. This
is a direct reflection of the quality of our design courses, and it is
important that the experienced teachers among us take this to heart even
though it is difficult to hear. We must place ego aside - this work isn't
about us an individual personalities trying to hash out some sort of bizarre
pecking order or pay homage to what Bill originated. We are failing as a
movement, in this country anyway, and it is our own (un)doing. And one
reason I think this way is because I facilitate teacher trainings and see
what the students know. It is not a measure of success if students leave a
design course and write nice evaluations of the course and go on their merry
way; it's the retention and future application of what they have learned
that matters, and without such feedback, most of the permaculture teachers
in this country have no idea what those they teach do with this information.
Without this feedback loop, we think "it ain't broke", but people have
insufficient information to draw such a conclusion and believe that as long
as students keep signing up for design courses they must be ok. But I'm
seeing what people know and what we're doing isn't that effective. And
there's nothing wrong with my saying so, folks; it's ok for me to think this
and to want to do something about it. And I'd like to point out that many
students feel the same way, but they don't bring it up out of respect for
the teachers; and so, things remain the same.

We desperately need modified versions of the certification course. I could
teach an entire certification course on the design of human interpersonal
relationships based on the principles of permaculture and its approaches to
design - and I wouldn't need to teach about water, trees, or climate to do
so. For one doesn't need to cover these topics in such detail to get at the
principles of energy storage and cycling. I really would like people to use
their peripheral consciousness here to imagine the possibilities for the
application of our work. We are stuck in a one-dimensional approach to both
the content and process of teaching a design philosophy that is holistic in
nature.  Bill could get away with talking at people for 72 hours, I suppose,
because of his dynamism, but lets not fool that with good pedagogy. The way
the design course is taught needs to evolve. The people who are teaching it
(myself included) need to mulch ourselves and allow for the natural process
of succession to replace the pioneer species with more collaborative
students with fresh approaches to teaching. Many of our students are urban
activists who want to take permaculture to a political and economic level,
and believe me, our certification course doesn't address this well. But
perhaps more importantly, people who are applying the principles of natural
systems to the design of permaculture educational experiences have gone on
to facilitate unbelievable educational programs far better than things I or
most of the pioneer teachers have done. And we should be so thankful for
this succession rather than resist based on our need for control or respect.
And we should also recognize that there are indeed permaculture design
courses out there which are not anywhere near the format or content of what
we experienced teachers think - this is a reality, and we must be aware of
it.

So, even though I am tired of the critiques, I am hanging on to the notion
that there are more of us out there who want to be self-reflective and take
permaculture to the next level. When people within our movement discredit
efforts to broaden and deepen our collective understanding of permaculture,
we miss an opportunity to evaluate and redesign our system, and that is my
higher calling, friends.

Michael Kramer