New Knighting Procedure

Connor L. wrote: OB1, the problem is that not every Jedi needs to learn the same lessons before becoming a Knight.

We HAVE standardized the process in a lot of ways. The IP is the same for everybody. You learn what you need to KNOW about being a Jedi. Then, the Apprenticeship is learning how to apply those ideas in personalized lessons.

I am brainstorming because I am an ideas guy. I LOVE ideas. So, now my brain is on it...

Perhaps, you could say that each Apprentice will get a set of 15 lessons (let's just say), with the Training Master's discretion to add lessons if need be.

Then, the lessons could be either taken from a bank of established lessons that are accredited by the Knights via a majority vote OR a NEW lesson crafted for the student that could be approved by the Education Admin and then added to the bank via a majority vote from the Knights.

Once the lessons are completed to the satisfaction of the TM, they would send the lessons completed to the Knights to be looked over. If the lessons are completed, then the Knights vote majority yay. Then, the interview happens. Then, it's a Knighthood.

Thoughts on that, OB1? Here, the power of the Knights is really in what lessons are approved removing the need for Knights to vote on people. Also, it puts the onus on the TM to make good lessons that will be approved by two separate parties before being assigned. Then, the final vote is about "did they complete the lessons" rather than voting for the person. The TM, then, would have ultimate authority on the readiness of the apprentice. Perhaps with a Council or Knight override if the TM is being unfair to the apprentice.

My brain just does things. I dunno if that's what you had in mind or not.

I definitely like where youre going with that! I know one of the things that many educational and professional licensing programs do is to split the lessons into different domains of competence and then teach and test across the domains. Everyone needs to have a minumum score within each domain in order to pass. Its an intensive process to do that thoroughly but the result is often a high level of competence - or at least subject mastery- for the graduates.

But right off the bat, how do you categorize all the sub-components of Knighthood? How do you articulate exactly what it takes or what it means to be a jedi knight? Some of you have been hammering this out for awhile so i know theres some ideas out there.
Speaking of that, i am very curious what is the difference between a Jedi and a Knight? When i first got here it seemed the effective answer to that was “Knights help with the offline events and the running of the web site”.

Is that still what it means to be a Knight? Isnt there supposed to be some character development? Some life-management, some personal insight? Courage, honor, skill? All that kind of stuff? Yall are the Knights, lol, you tell me.

So, if its more than just volunteering to help with the website- like if the training is really meant to build a person up into a (lets just be lazy and use the word) “better” human being, then youre gonna have to reach a consensus on what a “good human being” is ... and until you have a clear (or clear-ish) and shared vision of the final product, its going to be difficult to build an effective training regimine.

Ok ok everybody’s excited lol i dont want to rain on the parade. I hope we all see the improvements that are best for the Community. Congratulations, good luck.

OB1Shinobi wrote:

Connor L. wrote: OB1, the problem is that not every Jedi needs to learn the same lessons before becoming a Knight.

We HAVE standardized the process in a lot of ways. The IP is the same for everybody. You learn what you need to KNOW about being a Jedi. Then, the Apprenticeship is learning how to apply those ideas in personalized lessons.

I am brainstorming because I am an ideas guy. I LOVE ideas. So, now my brain is on it...

Perhaps, you could say that each Apprentice will get a set of 15 lessons (let's just say), with the Training Master's discretion to add lessons if need be.

Then, the lessons could be either taken from a bank of established lessons that are accredited by the Knights via a majority vote OR a NEW lesson crafted for the student that could be approved by the Education Admin and then added to the bank via a majority vote from the Knights.

Once the lessons are completed to the satisfaction of the TM, they would send the lessons completed to the Knights to be looked over. If the lessons are completed, then the Knights vote majority yay. Then, the interview happens. Then, it's a Knighthood.

Thoughts on that, OB1? Here, the power of the Knights is really in what lessons are approved removing the need for Knights to vote on people. Also, it puts the onus on the TM to make good lessons that will be approved by two separate parties before being assigned. Then, the final vote is about "did they complete the lessons" rather than voting for the person. The TM, then, would have ultimate authority on the readiness of the apprentice. Perhaps with a Council or Knight override if the TM is being unfair to the apprentice.

My brain just does things. I dunno if that's what you had in mind or not.

I definitely like where youre going with that! I know one of the things that many educational and professional licensing programs do is to split the lessons into different domains of competence and then teach and test across the domains. Everyone needs to have a minumum score within each domain in order to pass. Its an intensive process to do that thoroughly but the result is often a high level of competence - or at least subject mastery- for the graduates.

But right off the bat, how do you categorize all the sub-components of Knighthood? How do you articulate exactly what it takes or what it means to be a jedi knight? Some of you have been hammering this out for awhile so i know theres some ideas out there.
Speaking of that, i am very curious what is the difference between a Jedi and a Knight? When i first got here it seemed the effective answer to that was “Knights help with the offline events and the running of the web site”.

Is that still what it means to be a Knight? Isnt there supposed to be some character development? Some life-management, some personal insight? Courage, honor, skill? All that kind of stuff? Yall are the Knights, lol, you tell me.

So, if its more than just volunteering to help with the website- like if the training is really meant to build a person up into a (lets just be lazy and use the word) “better” human being, then youre gonna have to reach a consensus on what a “good human being” is ... and until you have a clear (or clear-ish) and shared vision of the final product, its going to be difficult to build an effective training regimine.

"Specialties" have been brought up in knight chat before, where certain individuals within the knight corps were more educated in certain area's then others, there are a select few knights who do send their apprentices to other knights for a single lesson or two on occasion, but its by no means a requirement or fully fledged "system". But I can see that being a possibility as things move forward. I think for the most part its more about just getting different perspectives about a topic in mind then anything. Then coming to your own conclusion as the apprentice.

An interesting shift in direction.

I look forward to see what comes of this. It seems that at least councillor burnout should drop a bit.

Rendering my input is something I try not to do often in the public limelight -- but I think that this is superb. I saw mention of this being considered in the last few weeks and thought "that will never get voted in," I'm incredibly pleased to see that I was wrong. This is a really excellent move forward. It's not the final solution, I don't think anyone would honestly argue that it is; an organization will be constantly evolving and improving - especially one where "betterment" is part of the process.

[hr]

Considerations:

-Knighting process will no longer be an esoteric one. So much of what happens at the Temple is actually invisible to most members. Perhaps, at times, that’s a good thing. In many cases I decidedly think that it is not a good thing. So, since the process of accepting new members into the ranks of the Knighthood will now be a matter of public (to other Knights, at least) knowledge, I’m all for it. As a sub-point to this, the idea is that Knights have reached a point where they have proven that they have some level of commitment to this place, these ideals, and their fellow Jedi – that they are interested in being earnest participants in the collaborative process of improving this place. That might not always be the case, but we can hope that six times out of ten this will be the case.

-There is more direct accountability. The Knights will all have the opportunity of exploring the evidence provided by the TM. While it looks like the general body of the Knights won’t be responsible for credentialing the a.div, they will be the ultimate responsible party for deciding the Knighthood itself. Again, we can hope that a majority portion of the Knights who involve themselves in this process will be clearheaded enough to concentrate on the work that’s been completed (we must note, of course, that how people (Knights, Apprentices, or otherwise) behave beyond their journal work is something that’s always taken into account).

-There have been claims of bias directed at members within the Council (my point isn’t to consider the veracity of this right now). With this change, the Council is no longer responsible for even communicating with a prospective Knight. They are removed from this specific process (unless it’s their own Apprentice, of course). This is positive not only because it’s granting a larger amount of control to the broader coalition of trained and invested members but because it frees up the Council .

-Brings me to the next, albeit connected, point. Running an organization is a lot of work. The Council may or may not be doing a consistent job in all areas, that’s fine, but they will likely do better if they have more time to devote to specific issues and continual tasks. I’m all for “anarching” up the system a bit and removing some of that vertical power structure. But, more than just “power to the people” it allows for a more effective and transparent leadership process. To my mind that’s key; more transparency is always a good thing.

-Note, I think majority rules is fine with a quorum of six – there’s a good range of Knights here, all with various backgrounds, ideas, and notions of training. I think that there’s a significant likelihood of enough divergent voices within a body that size to ensure at least some middle ground is reached (and, again, these decisions will not be made in an invisible vacuum. If the Apprentice is frustrated because of the decision that’s been made, they don’t have to wonder why it was made; it will never again be an issue of one or two Councilors unfairly holding someone to arbitrary standards. Instead, the reasoning will be out in the light of day. This number is also good because it helps to ensure that things won’t get stalled if not enough Knights are available and aware of what’s occurring (that’s an outside issue, too, of having better internal communications within the Temple and its various groups).

[hr]
Does this mean that we have located a perfect system? Heck no, but it’s a better system (an assertion I make based on my belief that transparency and collective governance are good things). I think this, and hints of other changes I’ve heard about, are a good sign for this place. Stagnation comes when power is not relinquished; what we’re seeing here is power being diffused out across a wider and more public base. To this, I say “yay!” And thanks to all on the Council who have had a hand in this and worked hard to make it come to pass.



As a final note: the whole Temple is a piecemeal construction – it’s not something that began with an absolutely clear prime directive. It’s something that’s grown up organically. I’d be more worried if power was being consolidated and everything was becoming opaque, but this is different. This is a move to triage a problem that people have been worried about for a while – something which has, by association, caused some frictions in the past. We’ll eventually need to consider larger power shifts, detailed guidelines and internal “legal” mechanisms, but all that will take its own sweet time to develop. I see this as the first real step in a long time down that path.

Most of council are knights as well so they aren't removed from the process of voting entirely, just not as dependant on.

It dilutes their power, too. Which is essential.

This also prohibits non-Knight Council members from having a major effect on the knighting of members.

This is a good thing. It frees the Council up to focus on other things, and it gives more authority, responsibility and leadership to the Knights. It builds a bridge of trust between the two and shows the membership that Knighthood is more than just another rank on the site and maybe worth the pursuit.

I ran and participated in boards such as this in the Navy for our Sailors and Marines. We, the Chiefs that conducted this board, had to select one candidate to be the best choice for being the Sailor/Marine of the Year. That selection, was given a promotion to the next rank, and entered the Chief ranks. It had huge career changing impact on people's lives.

The process worked very similar to what we are doing here. Sometimes there were members of the board who would show favoritism, or dislike, of a candidate. However, the other board members would call it out and it would be corrected. The integrity of the board has to be maintained. The Knights KNOW that the decision made in this interview/board will be monitored by the membership and policed by the fellow Knights. We have to make the decision best for the Temple, and the individual being interviewed. Regardless of personal feelings. If a Knight cannot honestly do this, then they need to recuse themselves from this process on the individual they cannot give an unbiased opinion.

This process can and will work, if we work together to make/allow it to succeed. It will also fail, if we allow it to become something akin to a popularity contest.

Me, I have faith and trust in the Knights, to ensure that this process will work and be a great new step of the evolution of our Temple.

I understand both the reservations people have about this and the optimism of others.
If a TM can’t admit their own apprentice isn’t ready to be a Knight they’re probably not ready to be a Knight themselves. If other Knights think that a TM is withholding a knighting because of personal reasons or agenda - that won’t be anything new..
I have the very unpopular opinion that just because someone calls themselves a Jedi doesn’t mean they are one and just because someone earned all their points, had done all their assignments, and had met the time requirements does not make them a Knight. I’ll gladly use myself as an example here.

This will prevent what happened to me to happen to others. That’s a good thing. No one should be rushed through because their TM is done and the basics have been met.

This will cause Knights to collaborate - to have to trust each other and to be everything a Jedi Knight should be. To be honest with themselves, each other, and the apprentices.

I really hope this goes as well as it could and I’m glad it’s being implemented. It feels like a step in the right direction.

Listen to each other. Trust each other. Give each other the benefit of the doubt. If you have a problem with someone - have an actual conversation with the person you have a problem with. Ask another Knight to mediate if you need it. Be better than some of us were..