Daveless, Less Dave, Lest Dave, Let Dave

Do we need Dave?
Can/should we get rid of the idea of 'Dave'?
Dave asks, "...what is the role of the facilitator/teacher/professor where we are using learning subjectives, where learning isn't measured and where content is actually other people?"

Well...Dave could be this-

Milquetoast

Or this:

Or this:

Or this:

Or this:

Or this:

Or this:

Or this:

Or this:

However, he's more like this:

(with maybe a little of the crazy chihuahua thrown in.)

My point is - I don't think that we can get rid of Dave, or the idea of Dave.

Dave is the fertile soil in which the rhizome began to grow.

Dave is the smart, flexible, creative instigator.

Even in (and maybe especially in) an environment of "more formal education" that he proposes we reflect upon, the individual, the kaleidoscopic faceted person (or people) who have the vision and get it moving are not only integral to what evolves: they are the first domino to lean, they are the farmer who throws out the seeds, they are the painter who tosses the first splash of paint.

I have worked for 23 years as a teacher.  One thing I have learned is that the one who leads, the ones who instigate, are intricately & idiosyncratically critical to the development of anything truly new and real.

There is a dearth of pedagogical leadership in many of our day-to-day academic experiences.

There is too often a lack of unique and diverse voices willing to show passion and push us to think in new ways.

We need Daves.