Tom Greening

II. Commencement: New Models and Implications for the Future: Power, Decision Making, and Coercion in Experimental Colleges

as co-leamers. Sometimes trust, encounter, openness, self-disclosure, caring, affective learning, and consensus decision making co-exist as valued means and ends. Entranced with these ideals, and high on the rich experiences which can thus be generated, we may forget that coercion and power games can evolve within such a paradise or be thrust upon them from without. If we do forget this, we can nevertheless count upon being rudely reminded of it by the unfolding of events. The history of experimental colleges could be written by charting the ways in which they dealt with, or, too often and to their peril, failed to deal with power issues. A definition of coercion is needed at this point, to distinguish it from other kinds of interventions which may be more congruent with the avowed principles of experimental colleges. I am using the term coercion in this context to mean those actions in which one person or faction misuses power unilaterally and forcibly in preference to genuine efforts at negotiation, dialogue, compromise, or caring for the wishes, needs and values of others. Coercers pursue their own goals rather than searching for collaborative relationships or cooperation with opponents. Facilitation of mutual fulfillment for diverse individuals or groups is regarded as less important than fulfillment of one’s own objectives. Coercers enter into win-lose power contests, abandoning attempts to find win-win solutions. Dominance and force are used in place of efforts to create synergy. The freedom and humanness of opponents are reduced as an end result of the