I wrote to Laurie Thomas soon after I had read ‘Self Organised Learning’ to say how much I had enjoyed reading it. He wrote back, a little later, inviting me to visit him and Sheila at their centre in Brunel. This offer was gratefully accepted, and I made arrangements for the visit. I went there to hear him personally tell me about his work and after talking to him for some time left as another one of his mature students arrived for tutorial. Later I enrolled as his postgraduate.
His Centre for Human Learning was set up within the School of Social Sciences at Brunel University. Essentially, people were encouraged to explore how they perceive their situations, reflect systematically about what they thought and then consider how to progress. Laurie and Sheila (the two were inseparable in all aspects of life, two sides of the same professional coin) guided them through this process of making explicit what they did, exploring what they knew in more detail and then to consider critically how to move on. This engagement with people placed them midway between academic studies and clinical psychology, helping their clients find their own answers rather than telling them or submitting them to treatment.
In this respect Laurie, along with other humanist psychologists was following on from the thinking of Maslow with his idea of self-actualising individuals, Carl Rogers with his positive self-regard for others, Bruner’s learning strategies and so on. All of them were intent of moving the emphasis from teaching to learning, from conditioning to thinking for oneself. The publication of Personal Construct Theory reinforced this approach and provided them with a stronger framework. This is because George Kelly presented his assertions not as an aspect of Psychology but as a complete theory. It thus gave this group more working space in which to expand a less statistical evaluation of people.
Kelly did not reveal much about the factors that had influenced him and this, in Britain at least, encourages others to place his work in a broader context. Bannister, for example, popularised his idea contrasting it with more established theories. Then, Fransella made plausible connections between Poppers Open Society and PCT, the questioning of authority in one complementing the inquiring nature of the other. They fit together smoothly but it is doubtful if either knew of the others work, perhaps even their existence. Most probably what links them in their knowledge of American pragmatism. Kelly, in particular, exhibits a strong association, albeit implicit, with the work of Peirce, James, Dewey and Mead.
Whatever the background of PCT Laurie embraced it as a foundational point and added to its construction. First, by being a prominent advocate for using cluster analysis statistics to enable The Repertory Grid – Kelly’s mental mirror for displaying his list of constructs to reveal relationships not visible to consciousness. Then with this information he was able to use it not as an end product of research but, instead, as the start of a systematic conversation. So collaboratively talking his way through other people’s problems was Laurie’s main investigative technique. It is detailed in two of his (their) books namely ‘Self Organised Learning’ and ‘Learning Conversations’. These highlight how PCT can enable people to learn how to learn by assisting them to review, reflect and reconstruct what they believe. These books reveal in detail the component parts of what can be a clarifying procedure. They provide a working text, a tool kit, for what can be done. Later Laurie shows himself to be a master craftsman when he takes off his laboratory overalls to deal with a complete whole, in an easy and relaxed and free flowing conversation.
These would normally begin by articulating the taken for granted established practices in order to show that polished repetition may be both efficient and an inhibition to higher standards. Old ways can then be reconsidered, new ways can be tried and there can be an overall examination of how to move forward. Then with a better understanding of the problem the conversation can move up a level to question how what is being reviewed was learnt. Are there faults, gaps, in your way of learning? Are they different learning approaches to the same problem? Can we increase the quality of learning?
By showing how something external feedbacks into how a person thinks is a crucial step in showing how one influences the other, like ripples on a pond. Moreover, once this connection is acknowledged it is possible to shift to an even higher level, one that brings the whole person into the investigation. Now the exploration brings one’s own beliefs and desires into the discussion. Is there a mismatch between task and person? Are personal adjustments required? What needs to change? Are the differences so great that a fundamental shift in perspective should be undertaken? This type of Learning Conversation has no end, more iterative and cyclic than linear, with the spotlight moving from task to person in a way that is intended to lift aspirations about both work and self.
My research involved a series of longer term Learning Conversations with a group (8) of women rowers preparing for the Olympics. Evidence showed they became more empowered to exchange values, aspirations, skills and strategies to function more effectively and successfully as a team.
Laurie deserves to be honoured for several achievements but high among them must be the results of his collaborative efforts in helping others to live more fulfilling lives. Most of this group, though, will not start their remembering by dwelling on how he has liberated their consciousness. Instead, their starting point will be more about what they feel rather than any studied thought. For them their sense of respect will begin by experiencing that warm glow of gratitude that comes from knowing an honest and decent and lovable man.