Monthly Archives: April 2016

That Time Trump Ran for Student Council

Posted on by
Reply

The students filed into the cafeteria to hear the candidates’ speeches.  In an hour they would be casting their votes for student council president.  The two opponents took the stage.  The outgoing president gave the instructions:

“You each have two minutes to state your platform.  Let us know what makes you an ideal candidate for the job.  Afterwards you will each take up to three questions from the audience.  Candidate One, your time starts now.”

CANDIDATE 1: “Well, you all know my IQ is one of the highest.  Please don’t feel stupid, it’s not your fault. Our student leaders are stupid. I have to say, if I were in charge of the nominations, I’d have looked right into that fat, ugly face of my opponent and said ‘you’re fired’.  I mean, would any of you vote for that? Can you imagine that face as our next student council president?”

“Uh, that’s time, Candidate 1. I’m going to stop you right there.  Candidate 2, can you please address the student body with what you hope to offer our school with your leadership?”

CANDIDATE 2: “Thank you, Madame President. Before I do that I’d like to address my opponent’s claims.  I am really shocked to see such a massive hairdo.  Did you all notice it today? It is massive. But I digress.  Clearly we have a problem with school resources.  I believe we can solve this by requiring all low-income students to wear badges so that we don’t inadvertently give them supplies meant for our gifted program.  At least until we can sort all of this budget shortage stuff out.”

Note: No actual high school students were harmed in the creation of this piece. These are, however, direct quotes from some of this year’s presidential hopeful candidates.  It is sometimes hard to imagine why candidates would find this kind of bullying to be an effective way of exciting the electorate.

Strong rhetoric, like that currently making up the debates, stimulates the part of our brains that respond to fear and passion, the limbic system.  When the limbic system is activated it hijacks the rest of the brain, cutting off access to the cortex and slows our ability to use reason and judgment.

As we come to equate this kind of bullying with strong leadership, we can consider where else in our lives we are likely to substitute passion for the critical thinking skills we know are necessary for learning and growth to occur.  Consider the supervisor who ‘sets an example’ by punishing a staff person’s error; the teacher who shames misbehaving students and the relationship that is drama filled and exciting, but lacks deeper intimacy.

In the months since the campaign season began we have seen increased intolerance for diversity and strong divisions along candidate and party lines as people dig in their heels to defend their own ideas.  The very concept of dialogue is seen as spineless and weak – candidates who suggest compromise find themselves quickly out of the running.

In our November 23rd posting we discussed the concept of Constructive Differencing, wherein our differences become a tool for expanding our sense of self and of the world.  When our leaders encourage us to embrace differences and challenge us towards greater understanding of one another, we become more flexible, agile and able to adapt to change.  If we allow fear and aggression to drive our decision making, we may just end up with the leaders, schools and relationships we deserve.

 

Are Teacher Evaluations Perpetuating Bad Teaching?

Posted on by
Reply

CaptureThere are many benefits to a process for understanding what works best for student learning. It is important to work towards development of a body of knowledge of good practice.  Schools want help identifying potential leaders and mentors to build quality practice.  The public wants and needs a means of understanding what it takes to support quality education if we are to expect ongoing funding, advocacy and involvement.

However, according to professionals in the field of teacher assessment, less than 6 percent of teachers actually perform at below standard levels.  And for those who do need improvement, there is little evidence to suggest that evaluation in and of itself causes teacher growth. Our current model for teacher evaluation is born from, and perpetuates, a hierarchical, top down model.  The result is a climate of anxiety, contempt and increased polarization.

What is needed instead is a means for identifying and strengthening what is working well and sharing this with other educators. Efforts like Teach to Lead (www.teachtolead.org) are moving towards developing a more self-reflective practitioner, which cannot be supported by top-down outsider rating.

In order for evaluation to be effective, it should allow for teachers to assess and document the quality of their teaching in ways that are most useful and relevant to them, while incorporating measures of qualities that support the needs and culture of the school.

Right/wrong, good/bad, better/worse measurements are less effective ways to promote learning.  In fact, they could result in the dismissal of quality teachers or the over promotion of ineffective strategies. Teachers often dread evaluations as they are often subject to rater bias.  Evaluations that carry punitive elements further distance teachers who may then distrust the evaluation and not provide as authentic an assessment as they would if they had more co-ownership of the process.  Every inherent strength has a corresponding limitation.  For instance, consider the teacher who is highly organized and structured.  Lesson plans regularly occur according to schedule and rarely run over. Too much rigidity, however, may result in a teacher who is less capable of adapting to student interest or individual student needs.

Evaluation of any kind is always going to have an element of subjectivity, whether it stems from the bias of the evaluator themselves or if the tool reflects the bias of the funding source of the tool.  An evaluator with a bias towards structure may rate the teacher above as high and teachers with a talent for creative and adaptable teaching styles will become engaged in a power struggle for recognition.

The most valuable evaluations for teachers and schools are those which promote self-determined learning and continuous improvement.  They should be a part of a system that promotes self-reflection as well as the integration of applicable feedback.

Herein lies another challenge.  Most of us are not trained in how to give or receive feedback.  Poorly given feedback can result in defensiveness, fear or shame meaning that even valid information stands little chance of making a difference.

What constitutes poorly given feedback?

  • Poorly organized feedback
  • Feedback given without dialogue before or after observation
  • Feedback that is not given constructively, rather is delivered in such a way as to create shame
  • Feedback that is tied to compensation
  • Feedback that relies on one-time observation that may occur on a day when performance was atypical
  • Feedback given from someone with whom there is not a positive relationship

 

Teachers must also learn to receive feedback if they are to integrate the helpful elements into their practice.  Many things can influence a person’s ability to remain objective when presented with another’s observations.  If there is distrust in the observation process or in the system overall, if what is being measured does not reflect our philosophy or values of teaching it is hard to be open to the information.  Our own anxieties and insecurities as well as our self-perception can also block us from considering the assessment fully.

 

Most of us fall victim to old stories or patterns when we hear critical information about our abilities. We protect ourselves from difficult feelings about the criticism by denying the information outright or accepting everything we are presented with without consideration. The golden rule of accepting feedback is to maintain a sense of curiosity and openness. This does not mean we need to accept everything to the point of feeling criticized but we want to learn to seek out data that will help us to grow as a professional.

 

Feedback is essential to honest personal and professional relationships.  It helps us to connect us and our behavior to those around us. Learning to lean into the discomfort others’ perceptions of us is helpful in developing deeper personal and professional relationships and becoming a whole teacher, one that can accept and become excited about areas for growth while building on current strengths.

 

If you would like to learn more about how to give and received meaningful feedback, Click here to be taken to our courses which can help you learn to:

 

  • Minimize judgement of self and others
  • Become aware of your own emotional biases
  • Regard evaluation with curiosity and with caution
  • Be discerning of information without being dismissive.

Gated Responses

Posted on by
Reply

Capture

Imagine a large gated yard.  To those on the inside, the gate represents security and perhaps a sense of belonging. To those on the outside, the gate sends a message ‘you are not welcome’, you are not part of this area. The way we initiate and respond to conversation is similar.  Words can be used to draw a fence around an individual or small group of people to the exclusion of others. Studies of relational bullying document well how some students can isolate others through exclusionary conversation.

At the individual level, a “Gated Response” is one that fails to acknowledge the emotion or need behind the sender’s question or invitation. Take this example of a conversation between a parent and child:

Sam: “We had a pop quiz in science today.”
Dad: “Oh boy, you really need a good grade, I sure hope you passed.”

Focused on his own frustration, Sam’s dad has missed the invitation into what Sam finds interesting.  He closes himself off and it’s likely Sam will turn away in response.

In groups, gated responses may be purposeful or unintentional. They can come from being unaware of biases or of the needs and desires of those outside of the more intimate group.  It’s easy to imagine how this might occur in a classroom.  One or two students are more engaging than others.  Over time, it becomes habit for both teacher and classmates to defer to these students to answer questions and indicate that the class is ready to move on to new material. One of these students brings up a question and the teacher, excited to have someone responding, deepens the conversation with the student hoping, perhaps, that others will naturally become curious and join in.

Gated responses can result in a small handful of people controlling the energy of a group. If the teacher fails to attend to what is happening for other students in the room, less engaged students will either further detach from the discussion or find ways of getting their energy into the exchange, not always in ways that contribute to shared learning.

Gated responses maintain the alliances that are part of the larger culture of the group or organization.  Consider this exchange overheard in a teacher’s lounge. The state has just awarded the district funds to carry out a new teaching initiative. Teachers are divided over the idea with some feeling excited at the new ideas and others feeling skeptical about more demands on their time. Notice how quickly the responses serve to keep the sides separate.

Michael: Here we go again, more mandates with no money behind them.  I give it two months.
Sandra: I don’t know, I like the experiential pieces.  I think my kids would really like this.
Michael: You’ll see.  Hey Yvette, remember the composting grant? I’m still finding worm casings in my classroom!
Yvette: Oh yes.  (To Sandra) You’ll get over your enthusiasm after you’ve been here a while. (To Michael) What about the recycling plan, the one where we were banned from using Styrofoam cups and plastic spoons at any events?!

Notice how Michael’s response skips over Sandra’s comment and draws Yvette into a conversation Sandra cannot participate in. Yvette supports the gate as she minimizes Sandra’s enthusiasm and redirects the conversation to past events that did not include Sandra. If conversations continue in this manner it’s likely the division between new and experienced staff will continue.

So what can you do to open the gates in your relationships?

  • Recognize when you are feeling protective and work to understand why.
  • Share reactions to what you observe happening in groups and what impact it has on you.
  • Ask for feedback from others around you.
  • Seek to understand another perspective.

Eliminating gated responses requires a willingness to be curious and to make oneself vulnerable.  The reward is an environment where people form meaningful relationships that can sustain disagreements and use differences as opportunities for challenge and growth.

 

 

 

The Arc of an Argument: Building closeness through conflict

Posted on by
Reply

Couples struggling to communicate better or improve intimacy in their relationship may look to language arts class for help.

Healthy relationships depend on couples being able to negotiate with each other to meet their needs. Gestalt therapy describe this process as the contact cycle and it can be compared to the arc of a story.  The contact cycleCapture begins with awareness of a desire or need, a progression to acting on the desire, contact with the environment and then withdrawal and assessment of the process. Many of us rush through this final stage and move on to the next desire or need without taking time to fully process the experience we have just had. Without time to assess and process, we are prone to remaining stuck in unhealthy or unproductive patterns.

Consider a common challenge, snacking or mindless eating. We become aware of some sensation that we interpret as hunger or desire for food (often we rush through this stage as well, eating sometimes before determining whether it is actually nutrition we need or some other comfort.) Aware of the sensation of hunger we conceptualize what will satisfy the need and mobilize our energy to call for pizza delivery or making a sandwich. Contact is made when we eat the food.

To fully complete the cycle requires an assessment of how we knew we were hungry, how we made the decision to eat what and how much we did, how we determined we were full and how we feel after having digested our meal. Eating disorders and unhealthy habits represent limited awareness of the process.

The same reflection process can be applied to interactions in our relationships with others. Couples who find themselves in counseling are often trapped in a pattern of relating to one another without awareness of how they may be perpetuating the very distancing they hope to end. Couples who remain focused on the content of an argument without paying attention to the ‘how’ of their arguments will find themselves having the same fight again and again.

A helpful tool for couples wishing to better understand their relationship and to build intimacy is to build in time after an argument to discuss what the fight was like. This takes practice and may take outside help. The goal is not to rehash the details of who put the dishes away and when, but to ask each other “What was it like for you to have that argument with me?” It is also best to let emotions settle before processing. One couple I know uses evening dog walks as a time to review how well they were able to fight.

The following checklist can help direct your attention to the ‘how’ of

  • How did I feel when we started our discussion?
  • What wishes and fears did I have about the conversation?
  • How well did I communicate my needs to the other person?
  • What do I remember about physical sensations (muscle tension, churning stomach, etc.) and what am I aware of now?
  • What did my partner do that helped me feel heard?
  • What do I know about how I helped my partner feel heard?
  • What old wounds or habits am I aware of that were activated during our fight?
  • What will I do differently next time?