Introduction  The ECRS Approach  Games  Cultural Messages  Play Parties  Dancing  Singing  Exploring Outdoors  Dramatics  Informal Dramatics  Small Scenes  Storytelling  Puppetry  Crafts and Art  Special Populations  Program Planning  Dear Eddie  » Past, Present, Future  Resources

       The Eastern Cooperative Recreation School is based on the principle that play is an important part of the human experience. Play benefits us in many ways. It builds community, stretches personal abilities, and helps us explore new ways of functioning as people and as groups. The kinds of play activity taught at ECRS provide a refreshing contrast to society's current performance orientation in which we go to watch experts sing, dance or act instead of doing these things ourselves. ECRS is for participants, no matter what level of skill or experience.
       An important distinction between this recreation organization and others is that ECRS is based on the principles of a cooperative, and it is governed and operated by its members. This cooperative pattern of organization emphasizes the importance of each individual's contribution, and makes the organization highly responsive to its membership.
       Membership is open to any participant, the only requirement being the payment of a yearly membership fee. Members have many opportunities to participate in the work of the cooperative. They elect members to the Board and may attend the annual all-membership meeting and occasional other membership meetings. They vote on sites and dates for events, as well as other issues that effect the entire organization. Members serve on the many committees which are essential to the functioning of the cooperative. It is through these committees that the administrative work of the organization takes place. The committees deal with such issues as staffing of events, publicity, budget, mailing, fund-raising, selection of sites and the publication of a quarterly newsletter.
       The nine-member Board of Directors has final responsibility for most decisions, the exception being issues that are taken directly to the membership. The Board is elected by the membership for rotating terms of three years.
       Board members are not paid for their services, and there is no person hired to work on financial or administrative matters. All services to ECRS by the members are done on a volunteer basis, with the exception of the payments to staff at specific events. The staff for events are selected by the Board from a broadly-based group of leaders. Because of their long-time involvement with the organization and the relative continuity of membership, this group of leaders provides a source of perspective, expertise and information that is extremely valuable to ECRS, and their recommendations to the Board are taken seriously.
       Over the years, ECRS has attracted a wide variety of individuals to its events. While many people come specifically to build leadership skills, there are also large numbers who come for the invigorating fun. Although the two objectives seem very different from each other, they are two necessary parts of the whole. The outward focus on developing recreation leadership gives the organization a purpose and place in the wider world. The nurturing, fun-loving, caring climate which is fostered at ECRS events, (and which brings people back again and again) is equally important, for it gives participants a supportive base from which to prepare for leadership in their home communities.
       Taking its cue from the basic principle that process (not product) is the focus of the organization and its activities. ECRS is always in a creative state of flux. Members, leaders and board members perform a perennial balancing act in response to new needs and situations, all with the basic ECRS philosophy as a foundation. This continual shifting and realigning is one of the beauties of the cooperative. As long as the members remain committed to the process of keeping the purpose and functions current and vital. ECRS will continue to be the exciting experiment that it is now.

1969 - Geneva Point Center: August 9 - August 17
1970 - Geneva Point Center: August 15 - August 23
1971 - Geneva Point Center: August 14 - August 22
1972 - Geneva Point Center: August 12 - August 20
1973 - Geneva Point Center: August 11 - August 19
1974 - Frost Valley: August 10 - August 17 (Week 1)
1974 - Frost Valley: August 18 - August 25 (Week 2)
1975 - Holiday Hills: July 19 - July 26 (Week 1)
1975 - Holiday Hills: July 27 - August 3 (Week 2)
1976 - Geneva Point Center-July 24-Aug. 1 (Week 1)
1976 - Crystal Lake: August 21 - August 29 (Week 2)
1977 - Watson Homestead: July 30 - Aug. 7 (Week 1)
1977 - Crystal Lake: August 20 - August 28 (Week 2)
1978 - Pocono Environmental Center: August 12-August 18 (Wk. l)
1978 - Crystal Lake: August 19 - August 27 (Week 2)
1979 - Geneva Point Center: August 11 - August 18
1980 - Susquehanna University: Aug. 2-Aug. 10 (Week 1)
1980 - Crystal Lake: August 23 - August 31 (Week 2)
1981 - Sargent Camp: August 8 - August 16 (Week 1)
1981 - Crystal Lake: August 22 - August 30 (Week 2)
1982 - Crystal Lake: August 22 - August 29
1983 - Crystal Lake: August 21 - August 28
1984 - Camp Quinipet: June 23 - June 30 (Week 1)
1984 - Crystal Lake: August 19 - August 26 (Week 2)
1985 - Crystal Lake: August 24 - September 1
1986 - Crystal Lake: August 16 - August 24
1987 - Crystal Lake: August 15 - August 23
1988 - Crystal Lake: August 13 - August 21
1989 - Warwick Conference Center: Aug. 20 - Aug. 27

1972 through 1989, inclusive, Watson Homestead, Dec. 27-Jan. 1

Henry Schwartz submitted the dates of these main ECRS events, beginning with 1969, the first year he was an attender. For earlier dates, one would have to consult the famous "ARCHIVES" housed in Margaret Moyer's attic.

       The ECRS experience and approach can function as an orientation to life and as an important tool for assisting individuals in reaching their maximum potential. From the beginning of ECRS in 1940, two principles guided the board and the staff in their approach to the recreational skills taught.
       The first principle flowed out of the earlier experiences with Play Co-op, which continued in New York City until the late forties, and the National Cooperative Recreation School, which also ceased to exist in the late forties. The basic tenet was that individual growth and development in an activity came out of inner motivation, not out of an emphasis by an instructor on learning a skill. This tenet also embodied the concept that everyone can find his or her own niche in an activity. As Jimmy Norris used to say, "We all can act." It was always recognized that the living experience at the School provided an environment conducive to individual growth and development.
       The second principle was that the overriding purpose of ECRS was to train leaders, the leaders who would return to their communities and spread the ECRS philosophy.
       My own growth and development in the recreation field and in the cooperative philosophy of recreation goes back to 1939. In that year an exciting new world opened up to me when I first experienced an evening at Play Co-op. For the first time I experienced folk dancing, folksinging, crafts and games, led in a manner that included each of us. This was not the way I had experienced group games on the sidewalks of New York City.
       Within a few months my enthusiasm led me to join the 'apprentice' group. The apprentices accompanied leaders like Ruth and Jimmy Norris on one-night stands. We assisted the leaders, occasionally leading a play party ourselves and, when a square dance was announced, we would teach the people in our own square. After each evening we had a 'spilled milk' session in which the program and leadership were evaluated. This was an invaluable method of learning leadership through practical experience.
       In 1940, I was one of a group of Play Co-op leaders who helped establish the first Eastern Cooperative Recreation School at Hudson Shore Labor School. When I returned from the army in 1945, I joined the staff of ECRS as a folk dance teacher. Later, my areas became program planning, games, and practice teaching as folk dancing was taken over by others more experienced than I.
       In more than 25 years on the staff (and frequently on the Board), program planning and games became more and more important to me. My understanding of what these two areas offer to people of all ages and many backgrounds grew each year on returning to my home community. Semi-retirement in 1981 provided an ideal time to concentrate even more on putting the ECRS ideals into practice. I became a Games Consultant and enjoy the receptivity of people in a variety of different disciplines to games and the ECRS approach to leadership.
       This approach benefits people of all ages, of many backgrounds, and in diverse situations. Although I do occasionally conduct games sessions simply for the enjoyment of groups, I have chosen to work mainly with leaders, who in turn would use the games and the approach with their own constituencies.
       This has led to workshops for staff of recreation departments, teachers, rehabilitation therapists, school age child care staff, camp counselors, and those who work with persons with addictions, handicapped people, and in juvenile detention facilities.
       While still stressing the contribution that play and games can make to individual growth and development, enhanced socialization, and the relief of stress, I now highlight two major points in a games session: First, laughter should be with, not at. Second, no one should be made to feel inept, inadequate or incompetent in a game situation. This is simply an adaptation of that earlier and current emphasis on all participants finding their niche in an activity, growing at their own pace.
       A word about why I choose to emphasize games rather than some other activities for which ECRS is noted. Games are universal. In many instances the same games are played in many countries. And, unlike other activities, knowing enough games permits a person to play with any size group, in any type of space, with little or no equipment. In other words, games not only have inherent values for the participants but give the leader more flexibility in meeting group and individual needs than any other activity.
       This is not to minimize the values of other areas. Indeed, many of the values of games can be found in folk dancing, folk singing, crafts and dramatics. But none of these are as easily included in a program as are games.
       It is immensely gratifying to hear from workshop attendees - teachers, recreation supervisors, childcare supervisors, rehabilitation therapists - about how they have incorporated games into their work. This is what makes applying the ECRS philosophy and approach rewarding, - the knowledge that one has enriched not only one's own life but the lives of others.

The following is the transcription of a tape Eddie Moyer made for the ECRS board, in preparation for the weekend Fall 1986 Membership Meeting.

       Hello. This is Ed Moyer speaking to Alan (Lebwohl-Steiner) about the beginnings of Eastern Cooperative Recreation School.
       In the late 1930's, I joined the Play Co-op, which I heard about while listening to a speaker at the Labor Temple in New York City. We used to meet at Hudson Guild Settlement House or in Greenwich Village. During those evenings of three hours, we had games, arts and crafts, and folk dancing, with the leadership furnished by Ruth and Jimmy Norris, Frank Harris and Pat Emerson led some activities too.
       The Play Co-op was a democratically run organization, and we had membership meetings to decide what kind of special activities we would do at the Play Co-op meetings. One thing we had was a Cooperative Recreation Workshop, which went on for 16 weeks. There were four parts to the workshop: four weeks for crafts or arts (one night a week for three hours), four weeks of games, four weeks of folk dancing, and four weeks of dramatics. For the final evening we had a big party with all kinds of activities.
       We also developed the Cooperative Recreation Service, with some of the same people, who went out to various social, political and cooperative groups around New York City and in the metropolitan area to lead an evening of fun, including games, play parties, dancing, dramatics and some arts and crafts.
       I became aware of the cooperative managers' course, which was training for eight weeks in the history and background of the cooperative movement and in management of a cooperative grocery store. I took the course in 1941, and after completing it I got a job in a cooperative in East Orange, NJ. Many of the Play Co-op group were working in cooperatives, either as employees or board members of these cooperative societies in New York and the metropolitan area. Ruth Norris worked for the Cooperative League, which was the educational wing of Eastern Cooperative Wholesale and the cooperative movement in the eastern part of the United States.
       At that time these small cooperative groups and cooperative store groups used recreation as a way of developing a good group spirit and solidarity among the membership. The Eastern Cooperative League always had materials on recreation available, and I think Ruth Norris was responsible for that. When there were Eastern Cooperative League meetings, Eastern Cooperative Wholesale meetings, or annual meetings of local cooperative societies around New York City, the Cooperative Recreation Service was called upon to provide leadership for these activities. I think this was helpful in stimulating interest in the Play Co-op activities, or the activities that are used by ECRS.
       In the summer of 1942, Eastern Cooperative Recreation School held its third session at the same time as the League meeting at Massachusetts State College, and at that time I attended my first ECRS session. I was all excited about learning square dancing from Jimmy Norris, and playing games, doing dramatics and learning more about folk dancing. I had had some experience, of course, in the training courses in New York City and with the Play Co-op, so I was able to do some leading at ECRS that year.
       During war years, I was active as a recreation leader in the field camps for conscientious objectors, and attended several workshops of a different variety: the Iduhapi Leadership Lab in Minnesota, and Farmers' Union workshops which dealt with cooperatives too.
       When I came back to New York in 1946, I affiliated with the cooperative store in East Orange, NJ, where I had worked in 1941, and I picked up the threads of the cooperative movement. While working at the East Orange store, I kept in touch with Ruth and Jimmy Norris and the people of the Play Co-op. In 1947 I left the co-op and went to work in a mental hospital in Rockland, NY.
       But before I started to work at the mental hospital, I went out to the National Cooperative Recreation School. The National School had been going for about 11 years then; I believe it was started in 1936 by Ruth and Jimmy Norris, and some of the mid-western people: Carl Hutchinson (who was a minister), Darwin Bryan (active in Farm Bureau young people's work), Neva Boyd, and Charlotte Chorpenning. They organized the National Cooperative School for Recreational Education, which continued for four years and then became National Cooperative Recreation School.
       In 1947 the School was held at Mission House College, Wisconsin, with such fine people as Charlotte Chorpenning, Ruth Norris' mother (active with the children's theater in Chicago) and Neva Boyd, who was a professor at Northwestern University. Neva Boyd had developed many interesting theories and training programs in what we call cooperative recreation. In 1929, she did great experimental work with Bertha Schlotter in a school for the retarded, using folk material with retarded people. It was a great experience to take dancing lessons from her, to listen to her discussion and ideas on the theory of play and group work. She was a pioneer in her field. Neva Boyd's work and ideas and the expression of her practical ways of doing things have been transmitted to Eastern Cooperative Recreation School in practice over the years.
       At that School in 1947, we had two weeks of Theater Production. I remember very vividly my experiences with stage make-up and costumes doing "I Remember Mama." I was playing the role of Papa. We had classes in Puppetry, Group Organization, Group Theory, Leadership Training, Program Planning, Folk Dancing, Advanced Folk Dancing, Arts and Crafts, -a wide variety of activities, always based on the theories expounded by Neva Boyd, theories that have been embraced in ECRS over the years.
       In early 1948, through Ruth and Jimmy Norris and Earl Brookes (an ECRS member from the Arden, Delaware community), I got a job at Delaware State Hospital, based on their references and my experiences at ECRS. While working at Rockland State Hospital as a ward attendant, I had been doing volunteer work in games and folk dancing. And at Delaware I became a full-time employee as a recreation leader. Just before I left New York, I met Margaret, and a few months later she got a job at Delaware and then we got married.
       In 1949 both of us went to the National School at Mission House College in Wisconsin, just before we went to the cooperative community in Macedonia, Georgia. At the National School we found a variety of people, including farmers, social workers, recreation leaders and church people. It seems to me there was a great variety in the mixture of people, which made it such a dynamic experience at the National School. They offered the same type of courses as in 1947, and it was a very rich experience in play, with dancing, games, singing, another play production, and enjoying other people. The puppetry classes I took with Hans Schmidt were outstanding, and in two weeks we learned what could be done with hand puppets in a dramatic way.
       We met Sy and Hal Kantor at Macedonia Cooperative Community in Georgia, and our two families lived together in Pennsylvania after we left the community. In 1955, Sy attended ECRS in Netcong, NJ. I was aware of what was going on there and we attended a weekend when ECRS was held at Westtown School.
       So in 1960, I got back into ECRS and with my young son, Keith, we went to the 1960 ECRS Summer School at the NYU camp at Lake Sebago, NY. I became all excited again about the cooperative movement.
       In 1961, I was asked to teach with Lucy Fairbanks and teach a course in Recreation for the Ill and Handicapped, as it was called then. This was the beginning of my staff experience at ECRS, and from 1961 until last year, 1985, I have been a member of ECRS staff. I started out at that time doing the Recreation for the III and Handicapped class, and became an apprentice with Pat Emerson in dramatics, both Informal Dramatics and Small Scenes. Dotti Siftar, Sy Kantor and I had been working with Jimmy Norris and we had very rich training experiences in Small Scenes. At that time we were holding one-week schools and we didn't think it was possible to do a good job with a full theater production in such a short time.
       So over the years, I have taken on various courses: Leadership Training, Group Theory of Play, Theories of Cooperatives. I somehow think that ECRS needs to have those kinds of classes in there. We have to relate what we do in activities to the goal of trying to develop people who can learn to cooperate and learn to live together in a just society.
       It seems to me, in a kind of summary, that what we lack in ECRS is the variety of people; we don't have the rural people; we don't have as many social workers: we don't have as many recreation leaders coming. I think we need to tap those kinds of resources to provide a greater stimulation in the experience. I think we also need to keep in mind that the theories and practices and the philosophy are sound, as sound as the day that Neva Boyd enunciated such theories and wrote them down in a book on the theory of play and leadership.
       Back in 1961, when I was on the board of ECRS, I became aware that Ruth Norris was going to retire from the School. Sy Kantor and I left a board meeting wondering how we would fill such a void and thought seriously about what needed to be done to train people as new leaders at that time. This was the beginning of my thinking in training people to develop new staff. Over the years we have become aware, as a staff, of training people for particular activities. In 1964, when Jimmy Norris retired, we had several of us in training in dramatics: Sy Kantor, Dotti Siftar, and myself. In 1974, Pat, Dotti and I set up some training standards for dramatics, a series of experiences needed to do the job as a dramatics leader at ECRS. And this has happened to some extent in other classes. We developed an Intensive Leadership class, which was to help develop leaders, new leaders, and became somewhat of a requirement. We are doing it in dramatics at this time, following a series of training steps which are needed by people in order to fulfill the needs of ECRS in leadership. It is important that people have a knowledge of materials and techniques, but they also need to have leadership skills. And they need a sound philosophy of play and knowledge of what happens to people in the play experience. Over the years, the field of recreation has become a professional field of training. There is new knowledge coming out, new research on the need for play. But we still look back to the basic information and knowledge offered by Neva Boyd and Ruth and Jimmy Norris, particularly in the area of dramatics, where we do use a unique approach: the development of people in the acting experience and the relationship of the director to the actors with the focus being primarily on people, and secondarily on materials.
       So, I would say that I am still very much excited about ECRS; I think there is still a great need for the training offered by ECRS and I think we are doing a fair job in recruiting and training new leaders and developing people who are committed to a sound and vigorous theory and practice of play activities, using a variety of folk materials.

       Many people have asked me what it's like to have grown up at ECRS. Now, I don't think these people really mean "within" it, because the comfort of being at home in this community is obvious, a feeling many people experience from the first. The question is more about the impact of imbibing ECRS values and philosophy from early childhood. And to tell the truth, I'm not sure what difference it has made in my personal beliefs. My parents, after all, came with values and an outlook that meshed well with what they found at ECRS, and which would have formed the underpinning of my upbringing in any case. The focus on leadership development at ECRS has simply provided me with more contexts and more explicit words for the expression of these tenets and the interlocking framework they build. The same seems to be true for adults who come fresh to ECRS: we find commonality and build a community because the values, and the contexts and the words, resonate with something already within. Wishing they had found that music sooner, they wonder if my music is more elaborate, enlightened, or enduring. It is only more familiar, and I am still learning new harmonies, and new places to sing.
       Our members lead outside lives in similar capacities to the people with whom we assume we have less in common, the people who are not yet of ECRS. This raises a question I'm still trying to find answers to, despite discussions in many Theory classes: How do you take "it" home -- the magic, the ECRSness, the sense of community? This is not only a wish to bring new people to us; it is an urge to make outside situations more validating, more fruitful. So I'd like to explore an outside situation in much the same way as we discuss ECRS activities in Theory.
       ECRS philosophy has been predicated on, among other things, a greater emphasis on process than on product alone. For this discussion, I would like to change the vocabulary from product to end-point, because process can, itself, be the product. To clarify this, visualize a line of finite length, a time-line for an activity. The last segment of the span is its end-point, and process is the long segment leading up to it. At the start of the time-line is the structure, which is necessary in order to embark on the process, the playing. (Have you ever been expected to be playful in a game when nobody really told you the rules? Or been asked to ad lib the sequence of steps, when you hadn't gotten them into your feet yet? Or been invited to create a skit, without any theme or last line for focus?) So the line begins with structure, moves through process, towards the end-point. Product is not on this time-line. While we usually assume product or goal to be the last segment (the end-point), it can be seen instead as what the individual hopes to take away: that may equally well be just the enjoyment of the process.
       So what does this time-line have to do with my outside world? I play in an amateur orchestra. Orchestras are expected to perform, and they go through a rehearsal process to forge a better performance, the accepted end-point. The participants vary not only in their skill level, but also in their perception of the balance between process and end-point. What is more, it seems that many players are not even aware that this is an issue, that their neighbors may strike a different balance. No one talks much about enjoying rehearsal, although, with a good conductor, we all show the signs of enjoyment. But we do worry about whether the violins are going to mess up that bit in the concert, players occasionally comment surreptitiously on others' stronger and weaker skills, and we look back critically on our performance as individuals and as an ensemble.
       This focus on the end-point as the product pushes all kinds of buttons. The possibility looms of letting down the rest of the group, either by staining the elegance of the moment with a gaffe, or by freezing, thus failing to add the expected garnish to the whole. One fears publicly exposing one's competence, be it manual dexterity in one passage, or control of the instrument's voice in another. One fears risking too much disclosure of self in the degree of sensitivity shown in rendering the music.
       And yet we continue to subject ourselves to the potentially bruising aspects of this focus on performance -because there is pleasure involved in the process. There is all manner of shared experience: eyes meeting over a shared perception, be it of beauty, of flaw, or of humor; the pleasure of two parts finally meshing optimally, sometimes acknowledged by the rest of the group with a collective breath or applause; simply struggling together to master something that is challenging and that will, when the challenge is met, have the power to move us and our audience. And there is pleasure in one's individual process as well. After mastering the structure, both the skills required for a particular passage and the familiarity of the given notes and rhythms, the musician can begin to be playful: what can I bring from within me to make the specified notes more than a sum of the series, to give me ownership of the phrase? How can I stretch and knead, mould and caress the sounds of a solo so that, while the notes are undeniably correct, the voice is undeniably mine, different from any other's singing through my instrument? How can I prod the notes of an accompanying figure to best enhance the grace of the melodic line? In which ways can I do this, and yet blend with the other musicians and affirm the conductor's interpretation? These are the subtle differences that the listener perceives between two different renditions of the same composition, and that the musician strives for in playing.
       The consensus seems to be that performance, the attempt to put forth a replica of the best elements of rehearsal, is the end-point. I have not been the only one in the group to have my buttons pushed by this focus on the performance, but some musicians have always seemed less susceptible; nervous though they are, they enjoy performing and glimmer with that extra pleasure. In our most recent season, I began to move in that direction, but it took me some time to understand how. The crux is in the divisions of the time-line. For each individual, the moment of going beyond learning the structure and beginning to play within it comes at a slightly different point. The more critical factor in my attitude to performing is in where I perceive end-point to be along the time-line. When my perception places that moment between the end of the dress rehearsal and the start of the concert, then performance is an effort to recapture something passed, a feat of memory, and the music is static, the innovations cast and set in their most recent mould. However, if I can hold off the end-point until the conclusion of the performance, I can continue in playing, in process, through the concert. I must certainly take care not to make changes that will throw my fellow musicians, but I can move with some freedom along the path explored in rehearsal. Then my focus has changed from "will I blow it?," or even "I know I can do this," to "let us see what can happen...."
       So this is what ECRS has been doing for me: In being aware, at a very conscious level, of the play process filling the interior of the time-line, between the structure and the end-point, I have been able to understand this personal shift. Now I can take initiative in re-setting the fulcrum between process and end-point, towards a more satisfying experience. First, I must do this for me, and the focus is still on self. But as I become more practiced in the structure and better versed in the framework of the activity along its span, I can stretch beyond the play I find for myself, and reach out with my playfulness to others. I can then begin to exercise the aspects of leadership involved in self-forgetful participancy. I can weave stronger connections through play, help to set a climate of respect for and openness to others' progress in finding and using structure for play, and invite others to put off the end-point until the playing is truly done.

       It happened many years ago at a staff meeting. I was a newcomer. Ed a seasoned instructor. The issue being discussed was how much information should go into the Winter Workshop fiver. Economy of space and funds were of concern.
       I was arguing that course leaders' names should be included, with the rationale that people are entitled to full available information and, yes, who is leading the course colors the nature of the experience.
       Ed, in a strong voice, said, "Shelley, we are not running a popularity contest." At the time, I was hurt and confused. It took me several years to appreciate the value of that statement, as it also took a long time for me to fully value Ed's depth and complexity, as well as his understanding of the human needs within us.
       I now better understand the safeguards built into staff hiring policies used by ECRS: the Board of Directors, elected from within and by the membership, in consultation with the staff, was in charge of staff selection. Both these groups encourage members in their growth, offer practice opportunities and teaching responsibilities to those who demonstrate readiness.
       Thus the information in the flyer can reassure the reader that all courses are instructed by qualified leaders. What then, popularity aside, are the basic skills and characteristics required of an ECRS staff member? As I now understand it, they are as follows:

1. An extensive knowledge and love of the activity (or subject) being taught
2. An understanding of the participants' human needs:
   1. to feel welcome
   2. to be treated with respect and not patronized
   3. to be taught clearly and in digestible portions
   4. to have the focus be on the activity and the group
   5. to have fun while learning
3. To recognize and use material that is interesting, durable, time-tested (or at least has been experienced and well-prepared by the leader), and within the ability of the group
4. To put one's ego into an appropriate place, so that the focus is on the material and on the group's needs
5. To invite and make use of honest feedback
6. To continually seek out new opportunities for self growth

       This is by no means a comprehensive list, nor one on which consensus necessarily exists, but in my judgment, it may he the very minimum required in order to present in our leadership those qualities that best demonstrate what has come to be recognized as ECRS leadership.
       There are many people who can do it well, and many more learning to do so. Ed was a shining example.

       It is risky to teach by creating a negative example. Negative examples are all too ready to create themselves, simply due to normal mishap. It's enough to do the best we can and be ready to observe the lessons when we fail to achieve the intended result.

The following is an excerpt from a longer piece on ECRS entitled "E.C.R.S. Is!!!" by Bob Dunn.

...ECRS is the joy of playing and the shared community that joyful play enables.

ECRS is doing, learning and leadership. Our doing is the willingness to play cooperatively. Our learning is the discovery of the timeless values of folk traditions. And, our leadership is experiencing the roles of inviting, guiding and supporting others in the play process.

ECRS is unity and integration. Unity in play process is the outcome of many choosing to accept the protocol of the play experience as a means to its joy, and -- in doing so -- allow themselves to momentarily transcend individualness. Integration in play process sees all individuals as equal contributors to joyful outcome regardless of role, age, sex, race, theology, ethnic origin or physical ability...

...ECRS is tradition. Folk traditions use play to know joy, to celebrate life and its challenges and to bring peaceful, pleasurable harmony to the community. ECRS traditions use folk traditions as the basis of our play material and use cooperative, egalitarian group process to govern ourselves, manage our finances and plan and conduct our activities.

ECRS is family. It's about children knowing adults who are neither parent nor teacher and knowing other young people who are neither relative, neighbor nor schoolmate. It is about adults knowing children as equal play partners and knowing other adults in the simple, open, safe connectedness of the roles of the play process.

ECRS is a living system of values... Shared learning and responsibility in the group takes precedence over individual brilliance and influence. The wisdom of the whole is trusted, cherished, nurtured and guarded. Individual skills are valued, too. And, their greatest value occurs either when made available in the service of the Cooperative or when available as models for others in the group to use as a basis of learning and growth...