Q. What is the relationship between the Gregorc Style Delineator and the Mind Styles Model?
A. The Gregorc Style Delineator is an integral component of the Mind Styles Model. Its primary purpose, as a self-assessment instrument, is to help individuals move toward the Model's goals of increasing consciousness, being harmless to Self and others, and using the ideas and activities at the appropriate times.
Ultimately, the Mind Styles Model is the "mother ship." The Delineator is but one component.
Q. What is a model?
A. A model is a simple, economical, theoretical construct that represents its creator's viewpoint of reality. It is free of undue complexity; designed to show how internal and external resources can be organized; built on propositions and principles about what is true, real and relevant in the world; and usable for forecasting probable events along with advice on how to deal with the present and future. It is also deeply human because it is an intensely personal creation or as Nietzsche says, "the confession of its author."
Q. Do you have a list of suggestions on how to use the Model and the Gregorc Style Delineator correctly?
A. Yes. Delineator do's-and-don'ts are recorded on my CD, The Careful Use of the Gregorc Style Delineator. The do's-and-don'ts relevant to the practice of the Model are found, along with Signs of Successful Practice, in my book, The Mind Styles Model: Theory, Principles and Practice.
Q. Why did you copyright and trademark your corporate Phoenix symbol and the terms, Mind Styles, Gregorc Style Delineator, Concrete Sequential, Abstract Sequential, Abstract Random and Concrete Random?
A. I copyrighted and trademarked them in order to: (1) be a responsible creator and author, (2) have my intellectual property legally protected, (3) prevent unauthorized alterations, uses and adaptations, (4) receive due credit for my work and (5) earn just compensation for my labors.
This also ensures the quaIity and integrity of my mind and psyche development materials. Product integrity is why companies trademark brand names and why consumers can buy the products with confidence. Brand names assure users that they are getting the "real thing" not an imitation that could mislead and do harm. It is critical to protect products from being diluted, modified and corrupted by pirates and predators who look to make a fast buck at our expense.
Q. I attended a workshop which featured a styles model that looked almost exactly like your Mind Styles. Instead of CS/AS/AR/CR, however, other words were used. The descriptors were identical except for a few that changed columns. Your work was not cited. How could this happen?
A. Such a coincidence could occur because the model developer's independent research revealed a theoretical base and subsequent findings that were similar or identical to mine. If this is the case, evidence of these mutual discoveries is surely available.
On the other hand, the model you encountered may be a "knock-off" of my work and citations were omitted to prevent you from knowing it's a counterfeit. Research the history of any model you are considering so that you know you are getting "the real thing" and before you pass the counterfeit on to others. Also, please contact me if you find a potential violation of my work.
Q. When I asked a presenter for the underlying theory of the model of instruction he was presenting, he said, "The research says..." I felt that he begged the question. Was I wrong?
A. You were wrong in not pursuing an appropriate response. "The research says" is acceptable if you understand the researcher's theoretical base and methodology. If not, that phrase is meaningless. Maybe he didn't hear you correctly. Or maybe he was evading your penetrating question. Next time, hold his hand to the fire and get a definitive answer to your question.
Q. Why do you caution about mixing different style and personality models and instruments?
A. Mixing can be productive if the models have compatible roots and constructs. If not, various programs will die, flounder or exist in a loose confederation of disparate parts of questionable morality.
Remember, each model represents its creator's intentions, factual reality, assumptions, principles, definitions, doctrines, programs and procedures. Mixing the surface elements of programs and procedures while the unseen forces of intentions and factual realities and principles differ, will not result in a united "mega-model" despite all the best intentions. When in doubt, get the creators together and ask them if their "babies" can really get along.
Q. Can anyone learn any model?
A. Advertising propaganda implies that the answer is yes. My experience, however, says that anyone can gain topical information about any model. But, each fully practiced model will make further specific mental demands on the implementor. As a result, some people, because of the natural strengths and limitations of their Mind Styles, will not be able to fully utilize certain models with ease and integrity.
Q. Does this mean that state-wide and system-wide adoption of models, programs, books and testing systems could create problems among staff members?
A. Yes. Bear in mind that every model has built-in stylistic demands for compliance in order for it to work as designed. Therefore, the program will not be effectively implemented if the proposed user does not have the requisite mental qualifications and capacities. As a matter of fact, some programs are actually bad for the mental health of both professionals and students.
Q. Is this why mass adoptions usually fail and the evaluations show "no significant difference" after using them?
A. It's one of the major reasons.
Q. How can I know which model is right for me?
A. Use three tests for "rightness" or appropriateness of a specific model. First, is it a coherent system which addresses your needs? Second, does the theory and practice of the model work in the crucible of the everyday world and help to improve it? And third, do your mind and Self accept the model so that the theory and practice become silent guides to harmless behaviors?
